Solved Martin Bryant and Port Arthur

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

I was in the car at VFL park. It was the Sunday after Trevor Barker had died and the minute's silence for that is still vivid in my mind. There was complete silence, with the only exception being the metal halyards banging against the metal flag poles.

It was a good day, Stewie Loewe kicked a bag and the Saints knocked off the doggies, and there was a great atmosphere in celebrating Trevor Barker, one of the Saints big 5 names.

Then we left, hopped in the car and turned the radio on, and again vividly, I remember facing that big mural when I heard the news, so whenever I see it it always takes me back to Port Arthur.

I went to Port Arthur for the first time last year, and was semi surprised at the lack of recognition it's given.

Have the same recollection about being at Waverley that day. I reckon it was late in the game when Rex Hunt started on about some madman who had gone nuts in Tasmania. When we got back to the car we didn't listen to the post game review & had the radio on ABC all the way home.

I knew the daughter of two survivors from the cafe... absolutely no doubt who was responsible.

I really feel for the survivors and victim's families with the 20 year anniversary coming up... it will bring back horrendous memories.
 
Gee that a waste of time airing that rubbish, that lawyer wanted to put it all behind him but thought the best way would be to have a bit of me time and make it about himself and not the dead/survivors.
He needed a payday because it was Bryant's fault that he stole 500k off his clients and law firm.
 
What an unbelievably biased viewpoint by Noble. Because of one poorly used word, "the incident" instead of "an incident like this", he jumps all over it as prior knowledge. So, the embalmer's statement has to be taken to the literal meaning of every single word, yet at the same time Martin Bryant saying "I did it, here is how I did it, here's pictures" is dismissed? It's ignored? What level of bias is required for someone to completely ignore one statement, yet jump on ONE SINGLE WORD in another?

Wow, this guy is a ******* clown.

That's how conspiracy theorists work....fish out the tiniest inconsistencies to pick holes in the official record, while ignoring the bucket-loads of evidence that supports it.

It's not even "bias" really, it's just flat out lying and making s**t up.
 
That's how conspiracy theorists work....fish out the tiniest inconsistencies to pick holes in the official record, while ignoring the bucket-loads of evidence that supports it.

It's not even "bias" really, it's just flat out lying and making s**t up.
4 cops shot in NZ yesterday at The Bay of Plenty. Not one died. s**t that bloke with an IQ of 60 was a good shot!
 
And what exactly does that have to do with Port Arthur?
That Bryant is a good shot.
Seriously though, the bloke kept saying he didn't do it and how long did they put him in solitary confinement for before he pleaded guilty? There should of been a trial. It should of been mandatory actually to determine his guilt. Even more so now that his lawyer is in jail.
 
And what exactly does that have to do with Port Arthur?

Cause shooting at trained professionals from inside a house is totally the same as firing at unsuspecting civilians sitting down having their morning cuppa, dontcha know?:rolleyes:

Plus, all those Alabama inbred rednecks must be brain surgeons in disguise.... because nobody with a low IQ can fire a gun....
 
Last edited:
4 cops shot in NZ yesterday at The Bay of Plenty. Not one died. s**t that bloke with an IQ of 60 was a good shot!

lol, you're such a clown. be honest, can you name a single conspiracy theory you're not a believer in? :straining:

what's so hard about shooting people who are only a few feet away from you?

That Bryant is a good shot.
Seriously though, the bloke kept saying he didn't do it and how long did they put him in solitary confinement for before he pleaded guilty? There should of been a trial. It should of been mandatory actually to determine his guilt. Even more so now that his lawyer is in jail.

the evidence against bryant is overwhelming and if you think otherwise you're even dumber than he is. s**t for brains.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Another amusing conspiracy theory is the likes of hollow earth and concave earth. No doubt he's a part troll, part batshit crazy maybe, but look up concave earth by Steven Christ on YouTube for amusement.
 
4 cops shot in NZ yesterday at The Bay of Plenty. Not one died. s**t that bloke with an IQ of 60 was a good shot!

Were they all shot from around 1 metre away while they had no weapons, no body protection, and were not aware they were about to be shot?

Didn't think so.

Love the attempt to compare the two, though. If I were a barrister you'd be just the type of juror I'd want when I was defending Ivan Milat. "Yes you're honour, I want the twitching one who is constantly looking behind him, let's make him the captain of the jurors!"
 
Were they all shot from around 1 metre away while they had no weapons, no body protection, and were not aware they were about to be shot?

Didn't think so.

Love the attempt to compare the two, though. If I were a barrister you'd be just the type of juror I'd want when I was defending Ivan Milat. "Yes you're honour, I want the twitching one who is constantly looking behind him, let's make him the captain of the jurors!"
I actually think he did it. However, there should of been a trial. Bryant pleaded not guilty for a long time and he was put in solitary confinement for what? 90 days.
 
However, there should of been a trial.

why? Put all the victims (still alive) through more hell just to satisfy the adolescent morons who would just go on to ignore all the evidence anyway?

Those with the biggest stake in justice/the massacre got the decision they wanted, and idiot internet sleuths can GAGF. You’re not owed anything.
 
I actually think he did it. However, there should of been a trial. Bryant pleaded not guilty for a long time and he was put in solitary confinement for what? 90 days.

I agree with you sort of. I don't agree there should have (it's not should of btw) been a trial because I think they did the right thing not making a circus of it. The guy did it, there's no bloody conspiracy here, Martin Bryant did it. Having said that, where I agree with you is re his treatment. The cops were amateur in this and had it gone to trial he might've gotten off because a decent defence lawyer would've gotten the testimony thrown out. He had no legal rep present after he asked for one and they fobbed off his requests. That plus the video recorder often "stopping", well, * me those cops are lucky they got away with that s**t.

Also I agree with you re his treatment while incarcerated and the stunts they pulled to get him to plead guilty, like suggesting he wouldn't see his mother and that she'd kill herself etc. Again, Tas justice system very lucky to get away with this.

Having said all of that, Martin Bryant definitely did this. The conspiracy theories on this case require far too much imagination, and the facts in this case are far, far too clear.

There is no getting around the fact that Martin Bryant was captured at Seascape, as he fled a building he'd been holed up in for many hours, and that in that building he left three dead bodies, and that in his possession were the weapons used to execute them. There's no getting around that it was him on the phone to the police "it's just like a Hawaiian holiday" from seascape, and there's no getting around the fact that it was he who stole a car - after killing the inhabitants - to get to seascape.

You'll note I have not yet mentioned port Arthur. What I am showing you is that there is absolutely no doubt whatsoever that Martin Bryant killed the people in seascape, and the inhabitants of the car he stole. That's indisputable. He stole a car, killing a mother and two kids deliberately to do so, took the father hostage before killing him later, drove to seascape, killed the owners before having a siege with the police. All of that is fact.

Yet, conspiracy theorists would have us believe that somehow he did this either under mind control by the government, or in an enormous coincidence as some "expert marksman" managed to hit his targets from one metre away (not that hard!) at port Arthur and that Bryant was just framed for it, or that most incredibly he was snuck into the house at the last minute as a lookalike assassin (who also talked just like him, listen to the phone recordings with the police during the siege) was secreted out the back door, while they set fire to the house!

It's ******* insane. Bryant did it, so clearly, and he admitted it many times. However, the police and prison system were terrible in this and should've been investigated.
 
why? Put all the victims (still alive) through more hell just to satisfy the adolescent morons who would just go on to ignore all the evidence anyway?

Those with the biggest stake in justice/the massacre got the decision they wanted, and idiot internet sleuths can GAGF. You’re not owed anything.
why? Put all the victims (still alive) through more hell just to satisfy the adolescent morons who would just go on to ignore all the evidence anyway?

Those with the biggest stake in justice/the massacre got the decision they wanted, and idiot internet sleuths can GAGF. You’re not owed anything.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top