The basics >en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Bryant >He was revealed to have extremely low intelligence, with an I.Q. of 66,[5] equivalent to an 11-year-old. >is an Australian mass murderer who pleaded guilty to murdering 35 people and injuring 23 others in the Port Arthur massacre, a shooting spree in Port Arthur, Tasmania, Australia > Within fifteen seconds, he had fired seventeen shots, killing twelve people and wounding ten. Bryant then walked to the other side of the shop and fired 12 more times, killing another eight people while wounding two. He then changed magazines before fleeing
Q. So if you held a gun, you would pull the trigger with your, a finger on your left hand?
A. Yeah that's right, yeah.
>The killer shot from the hip (right handed).
Jace Martin
Q. Ohh right. And aah, did you ever practise shooting from the hip?
A. No never.
Q. Never?
A. Uhh uhh.
Q. Ohh right. And did you get pretty accurate?
A. No not really 'cos like I said I only used that AR15 about twenty rounds in that one and, and not many round, more rounds in the AR10. So, and I, I never got round to using the shotgun because of it ... (inaudible) ... I heard from Terry that it had a bit of power to it.
>The killer shot from the hip (right handed). >The killer scored twenty head shots, from the right hip, in 90 seconds!
Dominic Powell
No Aussie neets interested in this
Seems american's are more interested in your mass shootings?
Samuel Bailey
John Howard is a fuckin' traitor. Bryant was nothing more than a patsy, why else would the evidence be sealed and no trial at all?
David Walker
>Halfway point through the interview
Q. Had your Kentucky. Martin just, just to remind you, you remember earlier when we first started talking that I, I warned you that you weren't obliged to say anything unless you wanted to.
>Beginning of the interview A. Oh, umm, I can't really say, I haven't got my lawyer here so.
Q. Well we have spoken to your lawyer and he knows that we're talking to you. A, He knows, he knows.
Q. And aah, has no problem with that so aah.
the lols keep coming
Jackson Morales
Lol was it sealed? Yeah sounds legit lmao
We dont have a lot of niggers in the south island and nz isnt militarized like usa so i dont feel that everyone needs a gun.
Brayden Hill
It was a false flag to disarm the Australian people to fortify the police state.
Lincoln Allen
i said to some dude last night well at least let us interview him and review the evidence.
His response was >no point interviewing a retard just trust the evidence
well wat?
The only way we can even get a bearing on martin is through a fucking wikileaks transcript
Xavier Stewart
Q. Had your Kentucky. Martin just, just to remind you, you remember earlier when we first started talking that I, I warned you that you weren't obliged to say anything unless you wanted to.
A. Yeah.
Q. If I just remind you of that and you're well aware of that and understand that you don't have to say anything if you don't want to.
A. No that's fine.
Q. Okay. Just so that you understand, that's all. It's a fair while since we started talking with you.
lol we've been talking to you for a fair while but you don't have to talk to us kid
lol
Caleb Ortiz
You have better gun laws than australia.
Adrian Green
>Secret Trial - no media, public allowed >Was held in isolation for like 20+ days or some shit >Plead not guilty multiple times >Evidence is not allowed to be looked over for 50 years >Bryant not allowed to be interviewed by the media for 50 years
Nolan White
by secret trial i mean no jury just some judges
If there was a trial he likely would have gotten off. He was never positively identified, everyone just said it was a blonde guy, no fingerprints on the weapons used at the crime scene, they could not trace the weapons left at the scene. He plead not guilty and confessed when his family came and told him they would kill themselves if he didn't.
In real life people miss with guns all the fucking time yet this dude scored more headshots than a CS go tournament.
Gavin Parker
One of the best soldiers Australia has ever had didn't think he'd be able to pull off what Bryant was accused of.
Alexander Rogers
He killed twelve people in - what was it - 14 seconds? And one person he killed with a single shot. That's some military type shit for sure.
Eli Clark
>Before hand goes from we believe:
Q. Martin, I believe you went to the Broad Arrow Cafe at Port Arthur on Sunday the 28th.
>Then turns into you did it lol
Q. We've got, we've got all the time in the world Martin. It's ahh.
A. Obviously I have too, so what does it matter.
Q. What, what matters is we'd like to know why you've done, what you've done mate, it's simple.
A. What have I done I mean, I know I've done the wrong.
Q. I've just told, I've just told you what you've done.
A. I've done, I've done the wrong thing by stealing the car.
Q. Are you understanding what I just said to you? 'Cos I've told you what you have done.
A. What have I done?
Q. You've killed thirty five people.
A. Ohh ... inaudible ...
Luis Rogers
It would bw cool if they did the making a murderer style show on this guy
But you know as if that is ever going to happen..
Aaron Price
lol it keeps getting better and better
Q. ... Said you couldn't park in a certain spot, so you didn't and sometime later you did move your car to that spot. We believe you went to the Broad Arrow Cafe with that bag over there, containing some guns and your video camera. You purchased a meal, you went outside, sat down, and then went back into the cafe. Took one.
A. But you might've. That's like me saying to you, that you were down there.
Q. But the difference is Martin, my car wasn't down there and I haven't been identified as being down there and I wasn't down there. And then you took one of the guns out of your bag and opened fire in the cafe.
A. Why would I do that, I mean.
Q. I don't know, you tell me.
A. Why, why would anyone do a thing like that, what.
Q. Well you tell us.
A. ... inaudible ...
Parker Baker
dude was a crack shot
Samuel Edwards
ok just read the full interview not very conclusive unfortunately
he flat out denies he had anything to do with it and wasn't in port arthur.
Now if he pled guilty which he supposedly did i'd like to read the transcript where he explains his motive and goes into his planning and shit like that and outlines how he killed all those people in his own words
What concerns me about this is stuff like this:
A. Not until me lawyer sees me. I'm sure you'll find the person who caused all this. Me.
Q. I don't find that a very funny statement at all Martin, to be quite honest.
A. You should've put that on recording.
Q. Ohh it's still recording at this present stage. So that is on recording.
WARREN
Q. Like I said to you before Martin, ahh, like I said before mate, umm, we are looking at the person responsible.
Henry Campbell
>"In this his ultimate demonstration of combat shooting skill the shooter fired one sighting shot at a fast-moving target of unknown speed from an unsupported free- standing firing position, the most difficult of all; instantly and accurately compensated for vehicle speed and weapon recoil with the same blinding speed as the computer gunsight of an F14 Tomcat, then disabled both driver and vehicle with shots two and three. This man might have been an indispensable asset stopping speeding car-bombers in Beirut, but his professional skills were far too conspicuous for Port Arthur."
Now your normal debunkers who say well any loon can fire a gun and he just sprayed the cafe and got lucky never account for him shooting people in a moving car from his movie car like it aint no thing.
Isaac Garcia
resident aus non-nest citizen reporting in and monitoring thread closely just had a beug mate
Brayden Johnson
didn't some aussie politican cunt say they'd need a mass shooting to pass gun bans and then this happens a few months later?
Carson Hall
>resident aus non-nest citizen reporting in and monitoring thread closely just had a beug mate
sorry i don't understand any of that
Jacob Brooks
"There will never be uniform Gun Laws in Australia until we see a massacre somewhere in Tasmania", said Barry Unsworth, NSW Premier, December, 1987 at a conference in Hobart. Prophecy or Planning?
he's probably not that stupid and just shitposted the test
Dominic King
Dont worry, neither did I
Australians are retarded
Owen Rogers
Probably some alphabet agent i'd say
Can't wait for pic related to turn up >i was there mate
Leo Rivera
That's certainly a possibility but if you read the transcript he admits to car jacking and kidnapping
If he was trying to cover his tracks pretending to be retarded he still would just flat out deny everything if he was smart.
Also his general marksmanship is out of the realm of any normie anyways. No matter how smart he may of been without legit training he wouldn't have been able to pull it off, i don't think.
Isaiah Fisher
Not gonna lie senpai, this is interesting, have a bumpos
Nathaniel Martinez
here is an interesting tid bit for you
> in 1995 the Tasmanian government ordered a mortuary vehicle that was capable of carrying 16 bodies at once.7 It is impossible to account for the government's decision to purchase such a vehicle when the state—which had been the most peaceful in Australia for over a hundred years—had an average murder rate of one every two months. No other state, not even New South Wales and Victoria—the states in which all previous gun rampages had occurred—possessed a vehicle with such substantial capacity. So why did the Tasmanian government decide it needed such a vehicle in 1995? And why did it subsequently decide that the vehicle, having proved its worth at Port Arthur in 1996, would not be needed in future and, in September 1998, offer it for sale?
Noah Williams
i just had a cone what i was trying to say is that I'm a non-neet and I'm monitoring the thread keep posting
Jason Roberts
Lol ohh this makes sense now.
Are you in sydney by any chance
Josiah Gonzalez
cone?
ok lad
Seems ASIO and ASIS where also at the cafe as well on the day >Among the dead, there is considerable certainty regarding the intelligence affiliations of Tony Kistan, Andrew Mills and Anthony Nightingale.8 Of the survivors, those who have been tentatively identified as spooks include Rob Atkins, Karen Atkins, Lyn Beavis, Justin Noble and Hans Overbeeke.
>Several army personnel were present, including RAF veteran Graham Collyer, Vietnam veteran John Godfrey and Major Sandra Vanderpeer. Intelligence agents from abroad may also have been involved. In addition to two suspicious Americans—James Balasko, whose role in the production of a fake video was mentioned above, and gun-control advocate Dennis Olson—there is the intriguing case of a Taiwanese man injured in the shooting who would not tell anyone his name, and whose identity in fact has been suppressed by the DPP, even to the point that Bugg referred to an "Asian gentleman" rather than a "Taiwanese gentleman".
I'm not sure what the author meant by production of a fake video
but i heard that their was a video of martin running around that was faked and shown as real by australian news stations and then they had to apologise for showing it when it was proven to be a fake.
Ethan Flores
All signs point to Mattin being a SLEEPER AGENT.
How can we know that the wikileaks source is reliable/not fabricated?
Ian Lewis
west coast best coast perth
Bentley Taylor
>Obviously, they cannot have expected the massacre to take place inside the café. The expectation seems to have been that it would be carried out a short distance away, on the Isle of the Dead. At least four people—Rob Atkins, Michael Beekman, Gaye Lynd and Rebecca McKenna—claimed to have heard the gunman make remarks about going to the Isle of the Dead to kill wasps.10 After the shootings, the idea that the gunman's original destination was the Isle of the Dead was expressed by several people including PAHS employee Ian Kingston and Assistant Police Commissioner Lupo Prins. Prins told the Hobart Mercury (31 December 1996): >"At one stage we thought he was trying to get on a boat which a lot of people were on, to go to the Isle of the Dead. Had he got on the vessel he could have shot everybody on board, so the potential was there for it to be a lot worse than it was." I have always been highly sceptical about the idea that the police were able to read the gunman's mind—to claim to know what he intended to do—when there are no indications, other than a few vague references to the island, that he planned to do anything other than what he finally did do.
it was a crazy man but we think he wanted to get onto the ferry and kill people on the ferry instead of the cafe
wat?
>This theory has the advantage of explaining why a café brimming with intelligence agents became the target. Unfortunately, the theory also asks us to accept two highly unlikely things:
>(1) that the gunman (or anyone working with him) never bothered to check the ferry timetable carefully before he came up with his plan; and
>(2) that at more or less the last minute the gunman, on his own initiative, made a radical change of plan and fixed on the café as the location, even though it was "chockers" with agents involved in the exact same plot.
Landon Rodriguez
meant for
Colton Mitchell
If you don't believe the wikileaks just petition the australian government to give the full transcript of his statement to police and also ask for the evidence to be released
Also what do you mean about sleeper agent? thats a very vague term
Gabriel Davis
>The key to understanding the massacre is thus that it contained at its heart a "double-cross" mechanism enabling it to eliminate a substantial part of the personnel who had actually been involved in planning it. It is certainly hard not to believe that Anthony Nightingale was involved in the plot: as soon as the shooting started, he leapt up from his seat to cry out, "No, no, not here!"
Levi Ortiz
I'm in here, OP. Interested and reading. I'm only 3 posts in, so give me a little time. Gun control is population control.
Sebastian Martin
I was being facetious about the sleeper agent thing.
Also i would argue that there is no correlation between IQ and firearm proficiency. Although i agree, it is suspicious regarding the expertise that would have to be exhibited to match these feats.
He may just have been playing dumb to avoid lengthy sentences, also.
Levi Gutierrez
If someone who works in intelligence, high-ranking political aide, someone who works behind the scenes is the target, then taking out everyone around the target including the target covers up that there was a main target in the room and makes it appear that they were in the wrong place at the wrong time. So either someone of importance was the target, or their main goal was sacrificing the few to disarm the many.
If someone were to do a thorough investigation into the background of everyone in that building, I'm sure we would discover the reason if it wasn't just a gun control push.
Benjamin Jenkins
Everyone I talk to believes it was faked to gun grab.
Christopher Campbell
Sure but if he was smart what was his plan? What was his motive?
People say he killed some bitch just to get the inheritance. Which is dubious because he was also in the car when the accident happened and could of easily killed himself
But that at least has a motive and a pay off.
Just killing a bunch of random people for no reason in particular makes no sense.
Also i would argue that there is a direct correlation between IQ and firearm proficiency.
Sorry but i doubt those child soldiers in africa aren't what i'd call crack shots.
But even more so you need training to pull off this type of shit and not just hurr i shot at some cardboard targets.
Even if he said he went to a shooting range thats still not enough to get gud at shooting moving targets and people like that.
Nolan Russell
see A theory is it sounds like intelligence dudes were in the cafe thinking the hit would go down on a ferry leaving the island.
They wanted to be nearby for disinifo/scripted bullshit/ cover up evidence and play the crisis actors
Unfortunately someone higher up wanted too off them as well so that there would be less people that would know about the plan.
Any survivors who were in fact intelligence officers would be in a tricky spot if they started denying that martin did it or questioning what went down.
The other victims probably don't know any better.
Henry Rodriguez
something interesting
lots of lone wolf young man killings in australia before martin in the late 80's and early 90's
>Hoddle Street, Melbourne, where Julian Knight killed seven people in 1987, Queen Street, Melbourne, where Frank Vitkovic killed eight people four months later, Aramoana, New Zealand, where David Gray killed thirteen in 1990, and Strathfield Shopping Centre, Sydney, where Wade Frankum killed seven in 1991. Now, to prolong this series of young Antipodean Rambos, was the Broad Arrow Café, Port Arthur, Tasmania, with Martin Bryant playing the lead role.
Kinda reminds you of that cycle of lone mass killers in america doesn't.
Justin Fisher
But didn't they make it out alive?
Nicholas Cook
No some of them died or were wounded see
Elijah Wright
some other sources if you want to read
murderpedia.org/male.B/images/bryant_martin/pa.pdf >Carl Wernerhoff is the pseudonym for a Sydney-based conspiracy researcher with a particular interest in the history of political assassinations and orchestrated tragedies such as the Port Arthur and Columbine massacres. He has a PhD in History and currently works as a teacher. His recently released e-book, What's Going On? A Critical Study of the Port Arthur Massacre
>Where were people like Bryant’s girlfriend, Petra Wilmott, who should have been able to shed light on Bryant’s mental processes in the lead up to the massacre? Why did no one ever interview actual eyewitnesses of the shooting? It was almost as though all these people had fallen down a rabbit hole.
Samuel Sanders
Can anyone describe to me what happened at seascape siege and who jamie was? and who is Sgt. Terry McCarthy’s ‘main man’?
Seems as dodgy as the fucking cafe shooting?
Asher Cooper
gooks out
Gabriel Morales
Once the fit of base passions unleased by the massacre began to subside in about 1999, a few conscientious Australians began to express concerns that, during the process that led to Bryant’s sentencing on November 22, 1996, major violations of the Australian criminal justice system had occurred, as well as shocking legal improprieties without precedent in the country’s history.
>interesting
Hudson Richardson
great thread, but you forgot that they sold his million dollar property before he was convicted, making sure he had no chance of a legal defense.
Furthermore under Tasmanian law an inquest was supposed to be held. It never was.
Nathan Harris
>This is a shortlist of twelve of the violations and improprieties that were required to ensure that Martin Bryant was locked away for the rest of his life without ever being proven guilty:
1. The identity of the alleged offender was made public by the Hobart Mercury on the morning of April 29, 1996, when it was stated that he had been ‘a 29 yearl old schizophrenic from the Hobart suburb of New Town’ whose father had ‘committed suicide 3 years ago.’ The actual name of the alleged offender was made public by the same newspaper the following morning and by all major afternoon papers shortly afterwards - before his guilt had been proven in a court of law. Under Australian law, a person is considered innocent until proven guilty.
Ian Richardson
Thats interesting isn't it why would he do that? Although he admits he was stupid with his money.
Mason Bailey
2. A photograph of the alleged offender was illegally published by the Hobart Mercury on the morning of April 30, 1996, and by all major afternoon papers shortly afterwards, including Sydney tabloid The Daily Telegraph (which is where I first saw it myself).
NB: The reason why it is illegal to publish photographs of suspects is that it influences witness statements, often making it impossible for them to remember what they actually saw. The wide circulation of photos of Bryant was clearly a major obstacle to identification when one of the most widely published photos was used as photo #5 in the May 14, 1996 police photoboard. At least two witnesses were honest enough to admit that their memories had been contaminated by their exposure to Bryant’s image in the media.
Blake Barnes
3. A Coronial Inquiry, although required by Tasmanian law when a person has died ‘a violent, unnatural or unexpected death, or as a result of injury or accident,’ was waived on purely sentimental grounds by the Prime Minister, John Howard. Not only did Howard have no power to overrule a Tasmanian law, it cannot be overruled by a Tasmanian government official or legal representative. Yet every move made by relatives of the deceased in calling for a Coronial Inquest has been subsequently denied by the Tasmanian Coroner, Ian Matterson, as well as by Tasmania's Attorney General, Ray Groom. The explanation was that an inquiry would only inflict more pain upon the already sufficiently traumatized survivors.
Evan Fisher
4. Bryant was illegally held in solitary confinement until he finally pleaded guilty in November 1996, a period of nearly seven months. During this period, he was allowed no access to the media, be it radio, television or print, and was therefore kept in the dark as to what Australia was saying about the massacre and his presumed role in it. Although he received a handful of visits from his mother Carleen Bryant and one from his girlfriend Petra Wilmott, these visits seem to have taken place in closely supervised (i.e., severely constrained) circumstances in which the case itself was not allowed to be discussed. As a result, Bryant was left in total ignorance for over two months of the fact that he was being held responsible for the Port Arthur massace. This is contrary to the fundamental principle that accused persons have the right to know the nature of the charges against them.
>They probably put him in solitary to protect him but yeah they should of told him what he was being charged for
Jordan Sullivan
5. Bryant’s police interrogation of July 4, 1996, was illegally conducted without any legal counsel or guardian present. What’s more, what has been released of the interrogation transcript shows that until July 4, 1996, Bryant was under the misapprehension the only charge against him was a single death. Again, this is contrary to the principle that accused persons have the right to know the nature of the charges against them.
Jayden Phillips
6. Neither of Bryant’s defence lawyers - David Gunson QC and Hobart-based barrister and solicitor John Avery – made any effort to defend him. They seem to have understood their role to involve persuading Bryant to plead guilty in order to avoid a trial. The problem with taking such a position is that Bryant denied carrying out the massacre at the PAHS on April 28, Gunson and Avery therefore failed to fulfill their obligations to their client to mount a defence on his behalf.
>they probably thought he had no chance and didn't want to be demonized as the guys who defended martin
Leo Powell
7. Since the intellectually disadvantaged Bryant had been declared incompetent to manage his own affairs in a closed session of the Hobart Supreme Court on April 22, 1994, he was not legally able to enter a guilty plea.
>I'm not sure if thats good or bad for those who say martin didn't do it
Lincoln Smith
8. The police have never properly verified Bryant’s guilty pleas using standard police procedures. ‘Standard procedure in these circumstances is to take the suspect out to the crime scene and ask for details of exactly how he committed the crime(s), i.e. where each victim was standing, what sex, how many bullets, where the weapon was reloaded, etc etc., all recorded on continuous (time-stamped) video,’ explains conspiracy researcher Joe Vialls. ‘The Victorian Police Service observed this standard procedure meticulously in the case of Julian Knight at Hoddle Street during 1987, as did the New South Wales Police Service after a street shooting in Wollongong in 1998.’ Vialls adds the following, entirely appropriate conclusion: the ‘Tasmanian Police Service has still not verified his guilt using this standard procedure, and its continued refusal to do so can realistically be taken as proof of Martin Bryant's innocence.’
Anthony Garcia
9. Prime Minister Howard called for the demolition of the Broad Arrow Café, again on sentimental grounds. However, the Café was part of the evidence that would be required for any future court case or inquest and should therefore have been preserved indefinitely.
NB: The hasty demolition of a crime scene – as that of the Murrah Federal Building at Oklahome City and the World Trade Center in New York – is a classic feature of high-level cover ups.
Nolan Martinez
10. Even today, no one outside Risdon prison - with the possible exception of his mother, although this remains unclear - is apparently allowed to speak with, or photograph, Martin Bryant. This is what the American constitution would define as ‘cruel and unusual punishment,’ but is apparently legal in Australia. However, it would certainly be illegal under various United Nations charters on human rights.
Isaac Williams
11. Bryant’s estate was sequestrated and his assets (which were estimated at $900,000) turned over to the state. Since Bryant has never been proven guilty, this amounts to larceny on the part of the Tasmanian government
Brandon Gomez
12. Since there existed no legislation which would have entitled the Tasmanian government to help itself to Bryant’s estate, special legislation had to be introduced into Parliament which applied retrospectively to the date at which it was introduced (which was on about November 15, 1996, a week before Bryant pled guilty). Retrospective legislation is always objectionable on moral grounds – in effect, it means entitling the state to penalize individuals for acts which were not illegal at the time they were performed - but this example must rank among the most dangerous precedents in Australian legal history.
Liam Reyes
The fact that there has been total silence on the part of the Australian legal establishment about Bryant’s treatment amply demonstrates that it does not take such matters as the right to a fair trial at all seriously. The only high profile individual who has dared to express doubts as to Bryant’s guilt is independent conservative politician Pauline Hanson, who is not highly regarded in many circles. Sadly, it is likely that Bryant’s case will remain unexposed unless it is taken up by a more credible critic of the establishment like journalist David Marr or social commentator Richard Neville.
