- Nov 28, 2006
- 28,855
- 11,890
- AFL Club
- Essendon
I don't necessarily.
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 9 - Indigenous Round - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Conspiracy Theory Martin Bryant and Port Arthur - Conspiracy or Cheddar?
- Thread starter PAdman
- Start date
- Tagged users None
randomly came upon this thread and was an eye opening read.
this article is very very relevant and relates to how susceptible eye witnesses are to misidentify suspects due to external suggestion.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-4848039.html
also Im not a massive conspiracy fella although Gulf of Tonkin and JFK and other similar 'dodgy' events will always lead me to question the 'official' version of any sort of event of this sort.
I am skeptical of 9/11 and now this event, and also Dunblane (LOL that old suicide by 2 headshot routine) after this lead me to that, ever since I read about Pavlovs work with Transmarginal Inhibition and how induced states of stress lead to a loss of previous conditioning.
Also after a bit of reading anyone suggesting that Bryant killed that Tattersall lady for her money has obviously not read about the incident as Martin was hospitalized for months and nearly died in the car accident that caused her death. Usually when trying to murder somebody for money its not a smart idea to put yourself in a position where you also die while doing the act.
He must of learnt so much from that master plan to then plan an attack where he drew the only two policemen in the area away with a false heroin drug find, killed at Seascape and killed 20 people with 29 shots (and counting the shots, making sure to leave one bullet in the chamber, that would be a hard task for someone with an IQ of 120 to do, count bullets while in the middle of a massacre) and all the other odd events that occurred (police at Seascape identifying being fired at from 2 locations, destroying the capabilities to do ballistic tests on the guns, being kept in isolation for a ridiculous amount of time, inconsistencies in eye witness identification, not being of a fit mental state to even legally be allowed to plead guilty).
So that guy, with all that preparation and planning needed to require to do something as horrific as the Port Arthur massacres, would kill the Tattersall lady while nearly killing himself. That would indicate to me the fella wasnt in a mental state to plan an attack of this sort.
The holes in the official story are huge but I couldnt care less if he did or didnt do it. The biggest issue here, and the one that the deniers just routinely keep ignoring, is his denial of fair process. Being kept in isolation for months on end until he plead guilty is not the way our legal system is meant to work. Their shouldve been attempted ballistic reports, DNA, , fingerprints, eye witness accounts, the whole lot and it shouldve been a display of how our legal system works in granting every citizen the right to a prove themselves innocent.
Thats clearly what we really lost our right to that day, fair legal process for Australian citizens.
this article is very very relevant and relates to how susceptible eye witnesses are to misidentify suspects due to external suggestion.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-4848039.html
also Im not a massive conspiracy fella although Gulf of Tonkin and JFK and other similar 'dodgy' events will always lead me to question the 'official' version of any sort of event of this sort.
I am skeptical of 9/11 and now this event, and also Dunblane (LOL that old suicide by 2 headshot routine) after this lead me to that, ever since I read about Pavlovs work with Transmarginal Inhibition and how induced states of stress lead to a loss of previous conditioning.
Also after a bit of reading anyone suggesting that Bryant killed that Tattersall lady for her money has obviously not read about the incident as Martin was hospitalized for months and nearly died in the car accident that caused her death. Usually when trying to murder somebody for money its not a smart idea to put yourself in a position where you also die while doing the act.
He must of learnt so much from that master plan to then plan an attack where he drew the only two policemen in the area away with a false heroin drug find, killed at Seascape and killed 20 people with 29 shots (and counting the shots, making sure to leave one bullet in the chamber, that would be a hard task for someone with an IQ of 120 to do, count bullets while in the middle of a massacre) and all the other odd events that occurred (police at Seascape identifying being fired at from 2 locations, destroying the capabilities to do ballistic tests on the guns, being kept in isolation for a ridiculous amount of time, inconsistencies in eye witness identification, not being of a fit mental state to even legally be allowed to plead guilty).
So that guy, with all that preparation and planning needed to require to do something as horrific as the Port Arthur massacres, would kill the Tattersall lady while nearly killing himself. That would indicate to me the fella wasnt in a mental state to plan an attack of this sort.
The holes in the official story are huge but I couldnt care less if he did or didnt do it. The biggest issue here, and the one that the deniers just routinely keep ignoring, is his denial of fair process. Being kept in isolation for months on end until he plead guilty is not the way our legal system is meant to work. Their shouldve been attempted ballistic reports, DNA, , fingerprints, eye witness accounts, the whole lot and it shouldve been a display of how our legal system works in granting every citizen the right to a prove themselves innocent.
Thats clearly what we really lost our right to that day, fair legal process for Australian citizens.
yeah its odd, you'd think it'd be much easier in a movie theatre to kill that many people, really puts the 20 kills from 29 shots into perspective.
- Moderator
- #204
Martin Bryant has an IQ of around 60.
In other words, he doesnt really have many smart ideas.
Quite the opposite.
He didnt plan it. He just drove down there and started capping people.
This bit I actually agree with.
Although its never been proven that he made the call, what do you make of the two local policemen being called away to the most isolated area of their district for a drug bust that instead of herion turned out to be soap powder or similar substance in a jar?
Thats an intelligent move to do. It may of been a coincidence that they got called away just prior to him shooting up the site. Its a fairly large coincidence in my eyes.
If he did make that call, it was damn smart move by someone who wants to murder loads of people and we know Martin Bryant was not a smart man.
It just seems such an intelligent move by someone who's mental capacity is well documented to be very very small.
Do you think that drug phone call was coincidence?
- Moderator
- #206
An unconnected prank call?
Cops deal with stuff like this weekly. Literally weekly. Either deliberate hoaxes, tip offs that lead to nothing, someone dobbing in something they heard from a BS artist or just following up simple blind leads.
What would those two cops have done anyways? Mobiles werent all that common back in '96 (and reception down in PA would have been non existent). He was only shooting down there for around 15 minutes tops before driving off.
Even assuming someone was able to place a call to the Cops, could they have gotten there in time anyways?
Port Arthur is pretty isolated.
Its hard for me to believe that the only two policemen in the area being called away just before the biggest massacre in Australian history occurs are two unconnected events. I wont say it wasnt just a prank although from the research I have done on this the source of that call was never attempted to be found.
I think its wrong to assume what they would or wouldnt of done if they were in the area but they at least wouldve been in the area, woudlve gotten there sooner and wouldve been armed.
2 cops is better then no cops. I read on one of those dodgey sites that it was the only drug bust type of call in the history of the area. I have read that in a few different sites although it seems to be a 'fact' that is only written about on those type of sites. I can't seem to find any 'legitimate' sources to corroborate that part of the story so it has to be heavily discounted.
I found this article about Australians having more guns now then before the shootings interesting.
http://www.smh.com.au/national/aust...mnesties-fail-to-cut-arms-20130113-2cnnq.html
Once again I just want to state that I dont believe Bryant is innocent, just that there are some massive holes in the official narrative and that the violation of his rights as a citizen set a disturbing and dangerous precedent that the legal profession and Australians in general should over never let happen. And that part of the story is definitely a massive exclusion from the official narrative.
Anyway, good chatting fellas. Had a good chat with Malfice in private messages that was illuminating as well, cheers for that. Definitely a much more complex event then how Australians have remembered it. Gotta ask the questions though, still a fair few big ones unanswered in this one but dont think any of us are going to get them answered anytime soon.
peace!
- Feb 14, 2002
- 17,797
- 6,860
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Lexton, Northcote Park
I know this may astound you, but if you plead guilty to a crime, the necessity for the prosecution to provide evidence of your guilt does not exist. The only requirement is that they provide the bare, uncontested facts of the case to the court. Evidence in mitigation and as to the previous character of the convicted person may also be led by the defence at this point. It is a strange system, I'll admit, but this is what it means to plead guilty. Bryant would have done so much better at his trial had he enjoyed the benefit of your expert advice. Most people convicted of murder in this country spend one, often two, years in gaol on remand prior to their trial. Of course, you already knew that, given your qualifications.
Yes dumbo, if you have read any of the previous posts in the thread you would see that its well established that pleading guilty in Australia then the case doesnt go to trial. The issue is with having him in complete isolation except for seeing his lawyers and guards for over 3 months.
Thanks for your redundant statement in pointing out the obvious though and totally missing why people have an issue with how he was treated after being arrested.
- Feb 14, 2002
- 17,797
- 6,860
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Lexton, Northcote Park
Well, which is it?
Has it never occured to that thing you laughingly call a brain that he was kept in isolation for his own protection?
Which jurisdiction do you think would have been best suited to hear this DNA, ballistics, fingerprint evidence and eye witness accounts? I think you might be hard-pressed to find one which would be prepared to hear this evidence, after he pleaded guilty. If he wanted to exercise the right to prove his innocence, one would think that a first step might have been to plead not guilty.
PoppedCorn
Saints
- Dec 29, 2009
- 20,244
- 39,559
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
manchurian candidate
kane249
Wibble
- Oct 27, 2006
- 52,765
- 70,856
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- Sth Freo, Liverpool, Chicago Bulls
Himm very interesting thread, just read the whole thing.
This massacre happened when i was only 7 and hit close to home.
I believe Bryant did it, but i wouldn't be surprised if he somehow had help in some capacity.
This massacre happened when i was only 7 and hit close to home.
I believe Bryant did it, but i wouldn't be surprised if he somehow had help in some capacity.
Even people with limited mental capacity are capable of good ideas. Just like highly intelligent people have the capacity to make some pretty damn stupid decisions also. While it may not be what you'd expect from a certain person, doesn't mean its not possible!
Bryant would have known what he was going to do was wrong, he also would have known the police would be pretty pissed with what he was doing also. An IQ of 140 isn't necessarily required to have a rational thought to take them out of the equation.
I find it quite annoying in society as a whole that just because someone isn't 'smart', they're pigeon holed into not being capable of so many things, yet something like this shows (in my opinion) that its not the case. Unfortunately in this case it couldn't be further from being a positive thing.
Exe Gesis
Kylo was here
- Sep 6, 2005
- 147,929
- 97,880
- AFL Club
- Tasmania
Yeah but he didn't do it
Exe Gesis
Kylo was here
- Sep 6, 2005
- 147,929
- 97,880
- AFL Club
- Tasmania
Agreed.
The recent Sandy Hook incident as reignited my interest in this "closed" case.
The idiot in question was lefthanded (shooter was r/handed I think) using a rifle FFS...
..............................................................................................
From the book Deadly Deception at Port Arthur by the late Joe Vialls.
"Brigadier Ted Sarong DSO OBE,
Brigadier Serong
"Brigadier Ted Sarong DSO OBE, the former head of Australian Forces in Vietnam
[/quote]
No, he wasn't he was commander of the AATTV, just a part of the Task Force we sent to Vietnam. When they can't get one simple detail like that correct, I ignore the rest of their waffle.
Yellow Feathers
Norm Smith Medallist
Oh please.
Don't trot out the "that's dirsrespectful" crap. We have you people echoing the same clichéd response with the 9/11 case...
How is findout out the truth disrespectful to those who lost their lives? If for some reason the conspiracy theory proves correct, wouldn't it be more respectful that everyone knew the real truth? If I was shot dead by a government agent working under a darker agenda I would want the world to know the real reason why I died.
I wouldn't want an innocent person to be the scapegoat either.
That's all great apart from the fact we know what happened and the the conspiracy theories are completely r*****d.
To all those who are amazed by his strike rate inside the cafe, there was a police training video stolen and put on the net about 7 years ago which showed the whole scene with the bodies still in place.. It was a training video that went for about 12 mins and was basically someone doing a walk through with a video camera of the whole scene untouched. I know for a fact its still online, but its horribly graphic and very depressing... But it does show that these people were sitting ducks.. A lot of them were shot still sitting at the table.. Their bodies still in the chairs with their head resting against the walls.. They didnt even have time to get out of their seats.. You wouldn't need to be any type of gun handler to do what he did in there.. They were all taken by surprise and it was all over before they even realised.. When he got outside of course the strike rate is less as people were running everywhere..
WinmarToLockett
Cancelled
- Banned
- #223
Of course he was in complete isolation. He'd have been killed if he was near any other prisoners almost instantly. People were applying as security guards just so they could get a chance to cap him.
What is more of interest is the SAS style techniques he used to disable cars and how calm he stayed the entire time.
The other thing that's baffling is how he managed to shoot with such a high strike rate at the cafe but then back at the house he fired hundreds of rounds and missed everything.
SAS style techniques to disable cars?
Trust me, those guys blow the freaking car into confetti, or they leave it alone. They don't play sneaky pete 007 stuff, they are either unseen, unheard or they are hell incarnate.
I'm sick of people assuming that the SAS are James Bond wannabes, that's not the role.
