Artist’s sketch of Bryant in court for sentencing November 1996, now shorn of his golden locks
by Mary W Maxwell
Dee McLachlan’s article, “Permission Denied,” showed that Stewart Beattie is trying to expose certain lies that have crushed Australia. Beattie is the author of A Gunsmith’s Notebook for Port Arthur (updated 2006). I’ve been glued to that book for the last two days. Wish I could interview Beattie but I haven’t been able to contact him so I’m just going to interview the book itself. Why not.
Mary: You are a wonderful book, a marvelous book.
Book: Thank you.
Mary: I love the layout of the chapters, and some humorous chapter titles, such as ‘The Video Overboard Affair” and “Did Joe Vialls Ever Play Fullback for Jerusalem?”
Book: The chapter on Vialls, and chapters on shootings similar to PA, such as the Aramoana NZ affair, can be skipped over if you need to concentrate on Port Arthur.
Mary: Funny you would say that. That’s what I already did. I knew from the “fullback” chapter that Beattie would say Joe Vialls is probably Ari Ben Menashe.
Book: I think the word is “maybe,” not “probably.”
Mary: I once saw a photo of Ari standing outside the Broad Arrow Café, but I have not since been able to track it down. You did however startle me by saying that a black van with tinted windows and Commonwealth licence plates parked itself in front of the Arrow for more than two hours after the shootings.
Book: Right, and no mention of that appears in the official record.
Mary: You also have a several-page timeline on the final pages. Example: “At 1422 hours Constable Hyland arrives at Fox and Hounds, assists only ‘P9,’ Simon Williams (Canadian Embassy official).” By the way I take that to be innuendo, and I love innuendo.
Book: My author, Stewart, has innuendo-ized 21 people in the book.
Mary: Ian Kingston, Richard McCreadie, Perks (Bugg’s junior), Chris Isles, Lynn Beavis, and Hans Overbeeke come straight to mind.
Book: With Overbeeke it’s a tad more than innuendo.
Mary: The Beavis chapter is intricate. What I gather is that Lynn got an award from her employer in Melbourne on the basis of having suffered trauma while she herself was acting as a grief counselor that day. Beattie makes the point that Beavis’s Workmen’s Comp paid her, but Wendy Scurr and other traumatized employees of PAHS (Port Arthur Historic Site) were screwed out of payment.
Book: Yes, that is because in November 1995 – by some feat of prescience – the employment contract deleted “trauma” as one of the injuries that would be covered.
Mary: I didn’t mean to say that money is the main part of Beattie’s analysis of the Beavis factor.
Book: Indeed there are many, many other parts.
Mary: People will want to know where to get the book, Book.
Book: No one has a paper copy anymore but there is a CD. If you look up at Worldcat.org to see which libraries carry it, there is only one in the whole world: The State Library of Tasmania.
Mary: Gosh, during the “20th anniversary” coverage on TV, many people said Tassie tourism is suffering these days. I’ll bet a chance to read the CD in Hobart would bring droves.
Book: Again, thank you for the compliment.
Mary: Actually, maybe there will be tourism to Adelaide to share my copy.
Book: Is Adelaide nice?
Mary: Couldn’t be nicer. Now let’s talk about whistleblowers. At Gumshoe I’ve written of “five collateral deaths” in the Boston Marathon case. They are persons with loose lips, or potential loose lips. (Jahar himself has majorly got potential loose lips so I worry he will slip on a bar of soap in jail). For the Port Arthur case, whistleblowers don’t get bumped off so blatantly.
Book: Two post-massacre deaths in Tassie are mentioned by Beattie. One is Ty Bennett, a young cop whose car “went off the road.” The other is the Tasmanian head of the SES – Special Emergency Service – who died suddenly in 2000: Joe Paul. We have heard that Hans Overbeeke’s son Benjamin committed suicide.
Mary: There will be heaps more collateral deaths unless we start learning some tactics of solidarity. This goes for any similar incident, too.
Book: You know what really gets my goat?
Mary: Tell me.
Book: It annoys that at some time before 2pm on April 28th, the water police were dispatched full speed on the motor launches Van Diemen and Vigilant down the Derwent River toward Port Arthur, but somebody called it off, and no mention of that is in the official record.
Mary: Which annoys you, the cancellation of the marine rescue or the fact that it is hush-hush?
Book: The latter, really, the dishonesty of the whole thing. But of course it’s horrible to realize that the survivors were waiting in fear at the PAHS from 1.30 to 7.30 without police protection, when the water police could have docked and helped them.
Mary: In the context of Beattie’s overall “J’accuse,” it seems a bit funny even to say “police protection,” if you know what I mean.
Book: Sure, this was a day for police treachery to a staggering degree, but a few officers came out clean, I think. Stewart reckons the naïve remarks made by Luppo Prins shows that he was not in the loop or “in on the joke.” Also, the fact that Superintendent Barry Bennett got elbowed out of the command by Richard McCreadie (who had less seniority) tells you that Bennett was not expected to be a “team player.”
Mary: Indeed Bennett suffered later. But I wish to opine that McCreadie, if he did “team-play” throughout the day, is also likely to have suffered. Twenty years’ worth of carrying burdens and living in semi-anticipation of being outed can’t be pleasant.
Book: I suppose you have a point.
Mary: That reminds me. You have a lengthy “transcript” of an interview conducted at Risdon Prison in October between Bryant and Avery. Martin says he likes Paul Mullen (!) but not Dr Ian Sale. He says Sale visited him in prison twice. But Sale worked for the Prosecution not the Defense.
Book: Martin also said in that interview that he was doing drawings for therapy. So the Gumshoe’s editor was right on that.
Mary: Gumshoe’s editor has a tendency to be right. I’ll quote below some stunning comments from that prison visit.
Book: Sure. Might as well toss “client confidentiality” to the winds. At this point any new data could only help Martin.
Mary: When next you see Stewart, please tell him I was so pleased by his quoting Livy: “Treachery, though at first very cautious, in the end betrays itself.” I mean I was pleased that he would quote Livy at all. I don’t think I have ever seen anyone do that.
Book: Was he the one who said “Romani, ite domum”?
Mary: No, I think that was John Cleese.
Book: What about Stewart’s quote from Dryden:
“Errors like straws, upon the surface flow,
He who would search for pearls must dive below.”
Mary: That’s an absolutely fair description of the depth of research that Beattie treats as standard. I have rarely encountered such a tenacious investigator.
Book: He and Andrew MacGregor walked the walk. They actually retraced the steps of the massacre with the aid of a local, measuring distances among the six crime scenes, the views from Arthur Highway, and so forth.
Mary: You know, Book, reading you has been an enlightening experience. I had Emily Poulsson’s little verse drummed into me when I was in Girl Scouts:
Books are keys to wisdom’s treasure,
[Think about it!]
Books are gates to lands of pleasure,
Books are paths that upward lead,
Books are Friends. Come let us read.
Book: I like it. I like it. Now how about going to the end of A Gunsmith’s Notebook to pick out a few choice morsels from the interchange between Martin Bryant and lawyer John Avery.
Mary: Thank you, Book. Morsels it is then, and on a later date Gumshoe will run the entire prison transcript, which I must say is the most amazing thing I have seen yet on this case.
John Avery did NOT bully Bryant but rather cozied up to him as a mate and utterly deceived him about the law.
The following was said just after Avery told Martin he would be willing to act as his new lawyer. On September 30, at his committal hearing, Martin had pleaded Not Guilty. His lawyer David Gunson, SC, was then taken off the case as it was not acceptable to the Powers That Be for Martin to have a trial. The date of this prison interview is October, 1996:
Bryant: Okay, will there still be a case. I mean will there still be a trial?
Avery: Well, we’ll talk about a trial or what we’re going to do in a moment, right. Now the next thing is do you understand legally why Mr. Gunson can’t act for you anymore?
Bryant: I think because there’s no defence.
Avery: Well, it’s not really that. Let me just explain something to you …Let’s use a simple example. There’s a fight in a pub and someone punches another person and he is charged with assault of that person. If that person goes to a Lawyer and says yes, I punched him but I’m going to go to Court and say I didn’t do it, it puts the Lawyer in a position of conflict because he can’t allow his client to go to Court and lie.
Bryant: Oh yes.
Avery: Right, now David Gunson I gather has found himself in an ethical problem because of what you have told him and what you want to do now, right.
Comment from the Gumshoe Team
Can you imagine a more subtle way to tell Martin Bryant that he mustn’t make that mistake again – telling the Court he is innocent, as that will cause the lawyer to be removed from the case.
Hello? Is Australia listening? Don’t worry that twenty years have gone by. We will fix this up. Yes we will.
— Mary W Maxwell hangs around the State Library of SA. To make an appointment to view her private copy of “A Gunsmith’s Notebook for Port Arthur” please contact her at maryWmaxwell.com.
Portrait above: We would like to know who the artist is, so we can credit him/her
See the green book in Column 2 of Gumshoe website? If you click on it you will get a free download of our new book, “Port Arthur: Enough Is Enough.” It has been updated as recently as May 8, to include PJ Allen’s remarks to radio show (p 56). And huge thanks to PJ Allen (former cop at Seascape) for that.
Dear Reader, if you wish to whisper in my ear instaed of posting a comment, pls write to mary.maxwell at alumni.adelaide.edu.au
“Come home [Damian Bugg].
And I suggest do it soon….
I believe that those who cover up abuse should go to prison….
Your time is runnin’ out to atone….
Perhaps He could forgive you if you just LET THEM KNOW WHAT YOU KNEW.”
Get a load of this. Start the video at 22 mins. Policewoman asks
“But it’s not funny is it?” Bryant says “What isn’t funny?” She says “This, what we’re talking about [the killings]… So why do you laugh?” He gives a reasonable answer in an angry tone:
“Because it’s good to get out of my cell!”
This is the video:
Mary….Unfortunately Stewart Beattie has passed away….
Another interesting point about Lyn Beavis is that she was allegedly ‘on holidays’ from the CBA Bank yet she was still entitled to Worker’s Compensation….. Neither you nor I would be entitled to WC on holidays!
And Stewart Beattie’s book is available as a PDF….
No, AJ, I don’t think Mr Beattie has been duking it out with St Peter. It’s only a fortnight ago that Beattie transcribed Pat Allen’s remarks from the Anne Delaney Breakfast Show. That gave Dee the material to write her “cemetery” article (May 8).
I later saw Pat Allen make similar remarks to a TV reporter (albeit watered down, or maybe edited out). It’s on Youtube, I will try to find it. Allen is my new hero. Love ya, Pat!
Well done Mary like the talk between you and the book :-). Lyn Beavis and many others are very suspect in this regard. This case never fails to send me into anger, so corrupt right under our noses, YET they still keep the truth from every-one.
The latest report, is pushing the fact with my Barrister in Tassie, see how we go, it maybe a last ditch effort?? or may turn the cogs into motion this time! will tell all at some point.
Cherri 🙂
Cherri’s petition has 2299 sigs. If you want to be the lucky 2300th, hop over to
https://www.change.org/p/the-hon-will-hodgman-mp-martin-bryant-deserves-a-lawful-coronial-inquest-and-for-all-our-sakes
I hope everybody has figured out by now that I was just trying to have a little fun, while tempting you with a few of the subjects in Beattie’s book. It contains fantasic information most of which I had not encountered before. (Not that I have tried to conquer “what happened that day” — as my real concern is: What can we do now?)
I had watched Youtubes of Wendy Scurr and Andrew MacGregor, and read Keith Noble’s book. I kept away from “A Gunsmith’s Notebook,” as I assumed it covered the politics of the gun buyback. Now I see that the gun stuff occupies the first 144 pages, but another 250 pages of unbelievably good sleuthing follows.
It’s Greek to me how this material from 2006 has not got into the homes of most Tasmanians in the last 10 years. They would be massively relieved to see it.
Into the valley of death rode the 2300.
I’m just sayin’.
“His lawyer David Gunson, SC, was then taken off the case as it was not acceptable to the Powers That Be for Martin to have a trial.”
As I understand it now. It was not required for Martin to have a trial as he changed his plea.
I lost faith in the law when I realised how this works.
Sorry to be a nitpicker, Dee, but it’s not “the law” that y’all should lose faith in.
It’s yer fellow humanoids.
These particular ones need to see Old Tickler, and I am planning to show it to them.
Here are a couple of links to save those interested some time …
And the Gunsmith’s Notebook pdf (incl in the above link) …
Keep up the great work, Mary, You’ve become my go-to-link for some real Aussie journalism!!!
Jason … long-ish-time-lurker-first-time-poster … 8 )
Bryant – Port Arthur Massacre https://www.facebook.com/bryantthemovie/ are going to continue the lie about Martin Bryant doing the killing their film and needs to be exposed doing for this
Why am I not surprised that the movie would continue the lie. If he made a movie that revealed the truth, he would have heaps of resistance from the government and would never get any government funding.
However, if he puts out a BS movie that pushes the lie, then he’ll get everything he needs and more.
I’ve read up a bit more on the potential film and it looks like he knows Bryant is innocent and is going to try and present a factual account of the massacre.
This could be interesting…
Terry l have talked to him directly that is not what he is going to do, l have set up a Free Innocent Martin Bryant facebook site https://www.facebook.com/groups/252705575083461/, which he has looked but is still not convinced, just look at the photo he used of Martin Bryant it tells his story.
I suppose you’ve sent him a link to the Gumshoe file on Port Arthur – https://gumshoenews.com/category/port-arthur/
I wonder how his screen writer is spinning the whole thing, it would be interesting to read it and see how far off the track he’s going.
I wrote a screen play about the massacre and it takes a bit of work to weave the whole story together into something that flows and has the elements that a producer looks for. The one last thing I had to do was contact the various people involved so that I got the scenes as close as possible to what actually occurred (like Avery threatening Terry Hill, or Bryant bringing his AR-10 in to Hill’s gun shop). It looks like he may up to that point himself as he’s talking about going to Tasmania to speak to people.
Generally I am wary of “filmmakers”. They can manipulate editing to twist any story into a believable tale. They can also be persuaded into editing out important facts if it the exposure of those facts might be detrimental to their “careers”.
Dee, I agree, especially since it would be an Australian production. The government influence in Australian film making is very significant. If someone didn’t tow the line, they wouldn’t have a ‘career’.
I figure it could only really be done by an overseas production company, but any producer has to look at the bottom line as to whether there is a profit in the production. There is a limited market for such a movie if you limit it to Australia. It has to have a broader appeal, you need some big bucks to get it into international markets. – Although, ‘Evil Angels’ (Chamberlain case) did make that leap into production and success.
Terry this link http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=382_1291544378 has what was in case against Martin Bryant and the Police Interview even Martin Bryant had Aspersers he could still answer questions clearly a few times he was a one rattled but that is to be excepted as he was on his own, it would be great if someone could make a movie of what really happened, but you will never get ASIO to admit there role in it
I started reading through that link – what a load of crap! Tell you what – no problem government, you present your ‘evidence’ in front of a Royal Commission, and you can have another free kick to present whatever you damn well want to – AND THEN WE GET TO HAVE SUBPOENAS PRODUCED AND ALL OF THE FREAKING WITNESSES CROSS-EXAMINED!
Come on, you’re big boys, this should be easy for important people like you to arrange.
After such a hearing, it should result in the whole ‘Port Arthur Conspiracy Theory’ being put to rest. Easy, just do it – double dog dare you to do it, LOL.
Yeah I personally don’t think this guys going to do anything new with his film. I think he tried to capitalise on the 20th anniversary and it backfired in his face…
I’m currently working on a doco with Wendy Scurr about her journey over the past 20 years. I’ll be releasing a trailer and crowd funding campaign in the coming months which I hope will gain traction to help fund the rest of production.
Love this sites reporting and the commenters discussions. Glad to hear Stewart B is still alive, would love to speak too him.
Jared that is great to hear,the one thing that could be done is we do know by Martin Bryant information to Police what he did do that day,and we know where his car was taken from him, at the Fortescue Bay turn off, and appears he then went in a BMW to Seascape, where he didn’t leave and he came out of the house burnt on the 29th April, the whole hostage thing he talks about makes no sense and doesn’t align with the events that occurred that day and the time in which the BMW was burnt, so l believe that this is something either put into his head or they played a bit of a game with him and did a role play, why would he have taken a hostage, there was no reason
Yeah it’s all very strange isn’t it…
I read another statement from a prison warden yesterday that quoted Bryant as saying he set the BMW a light before firing a few rounds in to the boot so that the hostage didn’t burn alive. Yet wasn’t the hostage body found inside seascape’s ruins along with the Martins?
I think some of the answers lay in the one and only interrogation video, the one that was highly censored (technical issues) before being provided to the court, the same one that Seven’s Sunday program broadcast snippets from…
A theme a believe which will resonate over time in peoples brains is Port Arthur Massacre was case of “Lies, Deception and Blackmail” – Bryant is innocent, if you watch the politician uses words like jobs and growth, a KISS message, what do you think
[…] interviewees included a book – I mean the book was the interviewee – Stewart Beattie’s A Gunsmith’s Notebook for Port Arthur. Didn’t even have to serve coffee to […]
[…] when Bryant’s “new lawyer” Anna Blue learned that Bugg had mentioned handcuffs, she went to Stewart Beattie’s book and learned that Mr Bugg had never entered any handcuffs into evidence and thus he is not allowed […]
[…] of State Library of Tasmania. That same library is also please to host the Maxwell-McLachlan book. […]
[…] Mary Maxwell never managed to interview Stewart but she wrote about his book, writing “Wish I could interview Beattie but I haven’t been able to contact him so I’m just going to interview the book itself. Why not.” She considered it a wonderful and “marvelous” investigation into Port Arthur. (Please link to her article “Mary Maxwell ‘Interviews’ Stewart Beattie’s Book on Port Arthur” here) […]