A Sort of Lost Manuscript about the Port Arthur Massacre

by Anonymous

Introduction by Mary Maxwell, LLB

Today, September 14, 2023, is the 10,000^th day of unjust imprisonment of Martin Bryant at Risdon Prison, Tasmania. A long time ago, someone sent to my Adelaide address a report about the day April 28, 1996. As I don’t know the author’s name, I did not publicize it.

Martin may not live long. I may not live long. Gumshoe may not live long. Let’s get this show on the road. Dee McLachlan, our editor, has agreed that we post it up for the 10,000-day “anniversary.” If you know who the author is, please convey that to me at my email: MaxwellMaryLLB@gmail.com. It is possible that he or she does not want his/her name to appear in public, such as for fear of consequences.

By the way, Stewart Beattie’s book is in DVD form in the Hobart Library, and so is the 2015 book by Dee McLachan and Mary Maxwell, entitled Port Arthur: Enough Is Enough. My 40-page booklet Moot Court Trial for Martin Bryant” is in the State Library of South Australia.

The following manuscript is 3700 words long.  Underneath it I will present what CNN had to say on April 29, 1996. It’s 500 words long.

By Anonymous:

Two weeks of miserable, unremitting rain, had given way that Sunday to warm autumn sunshine, and the Port Arthur Historic Site (PAHS) was filled with a happy throng of tourists, enjoying the tranquillity, as they milled about the Information Centre, awaiting directions from friendly tour guides and staff, or simply enjoying an informal lunch in the warm autumn sun or partaking of fast food in the crowded Broad Arrow Café.

Mrs. Wendy Scurr had just told her supervisor of the need for an extra ferry trip to cope with noticeable increase that day — many North American tourists among them. At the Information Centre tour guide, Mrs Scurr was distracted from her lunch, by a disturbing and ongoing ‘thumping noise’, which erupted and then materialised into gunshots from inside the Broad Arrow Café. The first plea for assistance made to Police in Hobart came from the Port Arthur historic Site Information Centre, when contrary to the official line, the first of ‘the outstanding team’ to arrive at Port Arthur, was former Nubeena policeman, Corist Chris Iles, at that time stationed at the Sorell.

He attended the Kodak Shop, at about 1348 [1.48pm], and spoke to witnesses Jim Laycock and Kyle Spruce. After inspecting quickly the deceased female, Zoe Hall, in the white Corolla opposite, he abruptly departed in his police vehicle at high speed in a northerly direction, on the Arthur highway towards Dunalley, and is never mentioned in any of the documents again. The community knew Chris Iles well, but here he breached their trust, and abandoned them. What caused Chris Iles to rapidly, depart with bizarre hast, to withdraw entirely and simply — disappear into thin air? 2

On the other hand, Richard McCreadie explains, “The first police arrived at 1412 [2.12pm] and confirmed activity at Seascape and the burning BMW.” 3 Here he’s referring to Constables Garry Whittle of Dunalley, and Paul Hyland of Nubeena, the former being the first policeman to come under fire from the terrorist gunmen inside Seascape. However, in direct conflict with Mr. McCreadie’s statement, one of this “outstanding team”, SOG team leader Sgt Andrew Fogarty was already there in the area, claiming in his statement to have departed Bellerive police station at 1.35PM — the same instance that Ian Kingston’s telephone call from the “Parsonage” on the Port Arthur historic site, was logged by Sgt Brett Smith at Police Headquarters, in the communications room.

Although the Arthur Highway was then sealed, Fogarty makes the unbelievable claim of having driven himself over its narrow, twisting, undulating alignment, from Bellerive to Seascape, a trip of around 90 km in just 43 minutes! Sgt. Fogarty further claimed, “At about 400 pm Senior Sergeant MORRISON arrived at my location…[where] …I gave him a detailed briefing…” 4

This took place some 330m north of the Seascape entrance. Transported by helicopter, the first SOG team was “tasked and proceeding” at 1557 (3.57pm), but Snr. Sgt. Morrison was not on that aircraft. He accompanied the second contingent, which departed by road at 1604 (4.04pm). Here you can see the deceit of the Fogarty claim.

A Task Force member informed two witnesses, whom we choose not to name, that a certain SOG fired a phosphorus grenade into the BMW, which burned, and so destroyed critical forensic evidence which would have ruled-out Martin Bryant as ever having ever occupied the BMW. The same type of device was fired by the same SOG, into the Seascape Cottage.

Sgt. Fogarty also played a key role in an incident, which occurred at Seascape at about 1630 (4.30pm). Constables Garry Whittle and Pat Allen, outside the grounds of Seascape, and by radio, twice requested from his superiors, “We have the Port Arthur gunman in sight. Permission to shoot”.

This was an attempt to halt a gunman’s actions, which were a threat to the life of “Sally” Martin, who, naked and screaming was being pursued around the cottage yard. Monitored by SES personnel, a senior police officer was heard to respond, “Permission denied this has to happen.” If the female was not Sally Martin, then who was she? 6

A manager for PAHS, Andrew Simmons (and his wife), just over the highway from Seascape was awaiting a colleague’s arrival at the arranged time of 11.00am. Mr. Simmons states clearly, “…it was prior to 11am. All I was in my front yard with my wife. …I heard very clearly two shots ring out.”7 The DPP deliberately mislead the Chief Justice by distorting these times. The DPP promoted Doug McCutcheon’s imprecise account over that of Andrew Simmons, even elevating the 3 shots to a ‘volley’ of shots.

Mr. Simmons’ positive estimation of time – ‘prior to 11amam’ – was promoted by Mr. Bugg as ‘at about midday’, and further led the DPP to state, “In that late morning… the Crown case is that Bryant shot Mr. and Mrs. Martin at about that time.” 8 Damien Bugg’s statements to the court were never tested under oath or challenged by Bryant’s Defence Counsel, John Avery…how convenient is that?

But remember, “Sally” Martin was still alive five and a half hours after Mr. Simmons heard two shots ring out. However, “Sally” Martin was not shot, instead, cause of death was determined as a ‘depressed skull fracture’. 9

Even more bizarre is the fact, that at approximately 1100 (11.00am), the proprietor of the Shell Service Station at Sorell, Garry King, was chatting to Martin Bryant as he supped a cup of coffee, 50 minutes by road away from Seascape! I° We are further informed of yet a second sighting of Martin Bryant at the wheel of his yellow Volvo driving through Eaglehawk Neck at about 11.30am.

So, who did murder David Martin in the forenoon of April 28 1996, and his wife Nolene (or “Sally”) some 3-4 hours later? The Mercury quotes Deputy Commissioner Luppo Prins as stating, ‘the first helicopter arrived at Port Arthur at 2.56 pm,’ to ferry wounded to the Royal Hobart Hospital. Aboard were two unarmed Constables as crew, Brian Edmonds and Damian Bidgood, whose duties restricted them to stay with the aircraft. After seeing the chaos and devastation, Edmonds was reported in The Mercury as having contacted the Hobart Major Incident Room, pleading, “For Christ’s sake, get some f…… police down here!” But his plea was ignored, why?

At the Historic Site, Craig Coombs explains, “A senior police officer arrived on Site … and took control of the crime scene.” In fact from his own staff records, we know he is referring to Det. Peter Hesman, armed with a service issue revolver, and who’s arrival at the Historic Site tollbooth was logged at 1626 (4.26pm). His police vehicle and of course its driver, departed 4 minutes later_ ..why?

Single-handedly, Det. Hesman could not secure the Historic Site’s 4 crime scenes, and to assist to any degree with the 500 plus tourists and staff there! Mr. Coombs was informed 3 helicopter loads of SOG’s were on their way, so he commandeered 3 four-wheel drive vehicles and had them deployed and standing-by at the oval to ferry the promised police officers to the site. However, when the single helicopter landed, just two young, unarmed, female constables fresh from the academy and off the beat in Hobart alighted, and later they were ordered to guard the corpses there over the entire hours of darkness to prevent animal attack. 12

One of several Historic Site staff members states; “At about 6.30pm that night I was on the veranda of CLOUGHA with Brian ALISON and John FEATHERSTONE fellow workers at the site. All three of us heard three shots..,” close by. 13 Detective Peter Hesman, later, while seated in the Motel lounge room shortly after 6.30 pm, was spoken to by Mrs Wendy Scurr. Mrs Scurr remembers Hessman loading, his service pistol under the table, out of sight of the throng of traumatised people sheltering there.

However, it would be more accurate to say Hessman was re-loading his revolver, as it would be contrary to police protocol, for him in this instance to have entered the unsecured crime scene with an unloaded sidearm. 14 Remember, according to the later statements of the DPP, Martin Bryant – the claimed ‘lone gunman’ – at this time had been under siege inside Seascape for 4hrs and 18 minutes!

So who fired the 3 gunshots? Why was the incident never investigated with appropriate vigour by Richard McCreadie’s “most outstanding team”? In official documents, no time is recorded of when Police were tasked in strength from Taranna to proceed to the Historic Site. Thankfully though, Coroner, Ian Matterson tells us he had to break his journey to Port Arthur at the Taranna PFC Post as it was, “…not safe for entry”. His party was delayed and they, “…waited until 1930 [7.30pm] before [they] obtained the all clear’,” for him to enter the Historic Site. 15

In summary, on the Tasman Peninsula on 28 April, 1996, an “…environment of trauma created by the event …, a prevailing atmosphere of fear, confusion and panic..,” was deliberately extended by those in authority which in consequence, directly impacted upon the estimated 500-800 people, visitors, PAHSMA staff, State Ambulance, Emergency Services, Fire Brigade volunteers and even some unarmed Police, after the initial 000 calls were received by Hobart Police Headquarters beginning at 1.32pm — for six hours! On the ground, it was the volunteers who carried the day. McCreadie’s “most outstanding team” played an almost insignificant role. 16

Then there’s the media contingent that require your consideration also: “In order to satisfy the media requirements a strategic plan was devised…” Contingencies were well in hand with, “…New South Wales and Victorian Police … requested to assist and provided experienced police media officers to support Tasmania Police Media Officer Geoff Easton and Government Media Liaison Officer Peter Hazlewood.”

On the afternoon of 28 April, the authorities seconded various buses and used them to ferry police and counsellors in, and conversely to ferry survivors out to the Police Academy at Rokeby where they were counselled, and their police statements taken. The following morning the same buses were utilised to ferry the world media journalists around the various crime scenes from Seascape Cottage to the Broad Arrow Café at the Port Arthur Historic Site.

Coroner, Mr. Ian Matterson, observed that, “the concept of the bus tour both amazed and pleased the media contingent.” This ‘pleasing concept’ was attributed to Peter Hazelwood, the Security Advisory Committee for Protection Against Violence (SAC-PAV) trained, and former ASIO agent who was at the time, employed in the media office of the former premier, Ray Groom (duty Minister on April 28). 17

Forward planning saw public relations man Geoff Easton SAC-PAV trained, and just a

fortnight before he spent, five days no less in Western Australia brushing-up on a Sac Pav Exercise, “Top Sher. Strangely, or in truth not so strangely, in a phone call to Easton at about 1420 (4.20pm)[incorrect translation of 1420], it was Hazelwood who made Geoff Easton of Tasmania Police aware of, “some shooting at Port Arthur.”

Again in the words of Geoff Easton, he explains that “We agreed that he [Hazelwood] would immediately make the how. and a quarter drive to Pt Arthur to control the media at the Police Forward Command Post…,” at Taranna. Easton remained in the Major Incident Room (MIR) at Hobart to among other tasks, fuss over Richard McCreadie’s presentation when meeting the global media. 18

Two years later, and in Adelaide, South Australia, Geoff Easton appeared before the Senate Select Committee on Information Technologies on 27 April 1998, chaired by Sen. Jeannie Ferris. Some of those in that committee were John Quirke (S.A.) and Senator for Tasmania, Brian Harradine. Mr. Easton answered a number of their questions, directly relating to the media and their behaviour during the Port Arthur Massacre and the aftermath. In his own words; he explains, “by drip-feeding the media we have sonic hold on the information that is being conveyed to the rest of the public.”

And because of the public record of this select Parliamentary Committee of inquiry, it would seem his method of “drip-feeding” was not confined to the media and the public! For when Senator Quirke asked Geoff Easton: “Has the coronial inquest into this episode happened yet!” Mr. Easton replied, “Yes, that is complete.”

This lie is irrefutable proof that Mr. Easton misled the Parliamentary Senate Select Committee and in so doing, the Commonwealth Parliament as well!  At this Senate hearing incidentally, and concerning the Coronial Inquiry, Senator Harradine had already been informed in writing that no such coronial inquiry had been held! The Easton — Hazlewood partnership, exposed by the Port Arthur incident, is now well cemented, as they’ve been teamed-up yet again in the Tasmania Police, as partners in the National Missing Persons Unit. 20

A very important solicitor: David J. Gunson, Colonel in the Australian Army Legal Corps Reserve, president of Tasmania’s Law Society & chairman of the state’s Legal Aid Commission from 1991-2002, Gunson was Martin Bryant’s Barrister, but stood aside for John Avery.

Martin Bryant’s counsel at his remand hearing on 22 May 1996, was Phillip Zeeman of the firm, Gunson, Pickard and Hann. But by the 4 July 1996, David J. Gunson had taken over, and it was he who consented to Det lnsps Paine and Warren to conduct a video taped interrogation without any legal counsel or guardian present – contrary to law. 20

By 30 September, 1996, and against the advice of his legal counsel David Gunson, Bryant entered pleas yet again of “Not Guilty”. Directly as a result of Bryant’s insistence of innocence, Gunson’s now untenable situation forced him to withdraw. Watching proceeding that day from the gallery, was solicitor John Avery. Primarily a criminal lawyer, Avery, born 1948 at St Helens, on Tasmania’s Northeast coast, was by the 2 [?] of October being touted as become Bryant’s counsel.

On October 4, Avery confirmed that indeed he was now Mr Bryant’s legal counsel, and herein a conflict of interest was exposed. For earlier in May of 1996, Mr. Terrence Hill had volunteered information to police, regarding events surrounding the receipt of a Colt AR10 Carbine at his gun shop premises for repair, left there by a person he’d identified as being Martin Bryant. Mr Avery was Terry Hill’s solicitor.

By early June the DPP, Tasmania Police and John Avery, conspired to coerce Terry Hill into falsely admitting to firearm offences, confirmed by their offer in writing of “indemnity against prosecution,” if Mr Hill was willing to accept that lie[sic] did sell guns to Bryant. Avery was still speaking with Police in relation to matters pertaining to Terry Hill up until

at least 31October 1996, when Bryant’s pre-trial hearing was announced as scheduled for hearing on the 7th of November, 1996.22

So after, ‘sorting out a few technical issues,’ John Avery became legal counsel to Martin Bryant, a person with a low IQ who in a previous sitting of the same court was found because of his low intelligence, was incapable of managing his own affairs. And so Public Trustees – a publicly listed company – was appointed to manage Bryant’s affairs. Hence it can be argued, by permitting or advising his client to enter a plea of “Guilty”, John Avery has acted unconscionably and contrary to the interests of his client.

Likewise, his actions in this instance and those of his co-conspirators, the DPP and the Police in relation to the matter of Terry Hill, could well be argued in a court of law as unconscionable at least, and most probably constitutes an attempt to pervert the course of justice. This is but a small part of this appalling episode. On Sunday April 28 1996, Ray Groom – coincidentally of course – was “Duty Minister”, and so in reality the ‘Minister for almost everything to do with Port Arthur’, and before 4 October 1996, he acted to ‘freeze and seize’ Bryant’s Slim assets!

While Premier Tony Rundle, exhibited the countenance of a stunned mullet. A week later Mr. Hill was targeted by Police who revoked his Gun Dealer’s licence, for what can only be described as alleged petty technical breaches. But the harassment continued, when thirteen months later and in July 1997, a taxpayer funded civil action was launched against Terry Hill by Neville Quinn, with Tasmania Legal Aid’s solicitor Roland Browne as the plaintiffs’ lawyer.

This outrageous litigation failed, but with still further associated events, Mr Hill’s assets were targeted and his family’s livelihood was destroyed. Terrence Hill and his wife are innocent of any wrongdoing, regarding firearms and Martin Bryant, but they are none the less victims of the terrorist attack at Port Arthur in 1996. Mr. Hill’s good name remains stigmatised by the unconscionable actions of all five parties mentioned above, and there has never been an apology or recompense. So much for Mr. McCreadie and his “most outstanding team”. 23

An advertisement in Brisbane’s Courier Mail on Thursday 21 November 2002, advised the public of a forthcoming presentation by the “acclaimed” forensic firearms examiner, Sgt Gerard Dutton of Tasmania Police at the Nathan Campus of Griffith University in Queensland. Organised by The Australian and New Zealand Forensic Science Society, there were to be two evening sessions; the first on Friday 22nd — to deal with the Balanglow back-packers murders, and Saturday 23rd November, to deal with the Port Arthur massacre.

Upon paying the nominal entrance fee — to go to aid scholarships — Mr Ian McNiven and his friend entered and took their seats. At an appropriate opportunity during question time, and through the chair, Mr. Ian McNiven asked a question of the guest speaker, Sergeant Gerard Dutton, Officer in Charge of Tasmania Ballistic Section, of the Tasmania Police and so one of Richard McCreadie’s “most outstanding team”.

Mr. McNiven’s question related directly to the forensic and ballistic investigation of the crime scene in the Broad Arrow Cafe at the Historic Site. He asked, “Was any solid empirical forensic evidence such as Federal Attire Dept. in’Tasmaria-” finger prints or DNA found that links Martin Bryant to the strident aobvisi and -nINK [sic] shootings in the café?”

A simple enough question. For his trouble, and by what were hardly veiled threats of arrest, McNiven was forced to leave the meeting early, with his question unanswered. Of coarse, this wasn’t the first time Dutton was asked this question: a medical doctor asked a similar question of the good sergeant at a gathering of the Association of Firearms and Toolmarks Examiners in America, to which Dutton responded, “There was no empirical evidence to link Martin Bryant with the Broad Arrow Cafe.”

Oh, and by the way, they didn’t arrest the doctor either, in that case. 24  Another prominent man in the line-up Richard McCreadie would no doubt include among his “most outstanding team of people in Tasmania,” was Supt Bob Fielding. He relieved Supt Barry [?] Bennett as Commander of the PFCP at Taranna in the critical morning hours that culminated with the SOG’s arrest of Martin Bryant.

Sometime before 9.30pm, at which time the Seascape portable phone’s battery — conveniently — went dead, in conversations with “Jamie” inside Seascape, police knew that at least 3 hostages were being held inside the cottage, and when the negotiator says, “Okay, and there’s nobody hurt at this stage…” Jamie replies, “Um none at all, no.” So Bob Fielding had to accept that his only source that confirmed the situation inside the cottage insisted that three persons beside the “lone gunman” were still alive and unharmed.

However, in a video headed “for police eyes only,” produced in-house by SAC-PAV man and Police Media Liaison Officer Geoff Easton, Bob Fielding confirms the source of the deliberate inferno that raised Seascape cottage to the ground, when with leer he boasted: ‘At the end of the day, er, I’m satisfied we made the right decision in fact, in waiting and forcing him to come to us as opposed to visa versa.” – end quote.

So exactly what are we being told here? From official documents we find that 34 minutes after smoke is reported as seen coming from the Seascape Cottage, and at 8.21am a male figure staggers from the rear or east side of the building with his clothes on fire, and as he attempts to remove them he momentarily disappears.

At 8.35AM, or 14 minutes later, the SOG officers arrest a badly burnt and dazed Martin Bryant without any resistance whatsoever. So not only was the fire brigade held back for 48 minutes after smoke was seen but also, no attempt was ever made by SOG Police to mount an assault on the cottage in an attempt to rescue the hostages.

Bob Fielding excuses his judgment on the matter by stating that despite all of the expert training that SOG officers receive, he believed that had they made an assault he would have anticipated up to “30 percent The media creation: casualties,” among police, and so that possibility, justified in Fielding’s A digitally-altered media own words, “forcing him to come to us [the police]”.

In other words generated photograph of police made the choice to ignore 3 persons they knew where definitely Martin Bryant still inside the cottage, and deliberately chose to let them possibly burn to death because the VIMP calculated a casualty rate of 30 percent among their colleagues. Was such a weighty dilemma, lightened considerably by ESP or forward planning? Did someone know that all the hostages were by this time already deceased? Plainly this must be so. You will notice Fielding never attempts to use the pathetic “exploding ammunition” excuse as a reason for the SOG team being held back for 48 minutes — that excuse was used by ballistic expert Sergeant Gerard Dutton much later. 26

Now here is the CNN report:

Gunman kills at least 34 in Australia. Police search for more victims in shooting spree

April 29, 1996. Web posted at: 1:30 a.m. EDT (0530 GMT)PORT ARTHUR, Australia (CNN) — A gunman with a semi-automatic rifle killed at least 34 people in Australia’s worst massacre before being arrested Monday when he ran out of a burning cottage where he had held police at bay for 12 hours.

Police said the 29-year-old man apparently set the fire in the cottage at Seascape, in which he was holding three hostages. Police had no information on the fate of the hostages. The cottage, a bed and breakfast, is about five miles from Port Arthur’s historic district, where the shooting spree began Sunday afternoon.

Witnesses said that a blond man arrived with other tourists at the ruins of a colonial prison in the Australian state of Tasmania. After chatting casually with some of the people outside the ruins, the man made comments about “WASPs” and “Japs,” according to an unnamed survivor. The man then entered a nearby cafe, pulled his rifle from a tennis bag and began firing.

“He wasn’t going ‘bang-bang-bang-bang,” said witness Phillip Milburn. “It was ‘bang’ and then he’d pick someone else out and line them up and shoot them.”Another witness, Rob Atkins, said that tourists at the site weren’t sure whether to take reports of the gunman seriously. (148K AIFF sound or 148K WAV sound)

“We thought it might have been someone firing muskets or something,” Atkins said, “as part of the show down there.” The gunman moved from the cafe to nearby pub, then seized a hostage at a gas station, stole a car, and drove to the bed and breakfast. News reports said that the owners of the cottage were friends of the gunman’s late father.

Some 200 police officers surrounded the guest house, and negotiators established contact with the gunman by telephone. The gunman initially demanded a helicopter to leave the area, but communications with him broke down, reportedly because of a problem with the man’s cordless telephone.

The man ran from the building with his clothes on fire shortly after the flames were reported by police. Ammunition inside the house exploded in the fire, preventing police from searching the building immediately for the hostages. “It doesn’t look very good,” said Police Superintendent Bob Fielding.

Tasmanians were shocked by the bloodbath. The dead ranged in age from 3 to 72. Most were from Australia, although at least three were believed to be from Southeast Asia. One American and a Canadian were among the 19 wounded.  “It is a very, very nasty business. It’s something that we’ve just never heard of in Tasmania because we’re a quiet little establishment,” said Trevor Sutton of WIN-TV. “This is just absolutely abhorrent to everyone.”

Richard Mazengarb, of Port Arthur’s tourist authority, said the killing spree would have a “detrimental effect” on the typically quiet, laid-back peninsula.(111K AIFF soundor 111K WAV sound). From 1830 until 1877, Port Arthur’s penal colony was one of the British empire’s most remote and harsh sites. The prison is Tasmania’s most popular tourist attraction, located on the Tasmanian Peninsula in the southeastern part of the state.