A crime too sensitive to investigate… "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. The Port Arthur massacre was the biggest mass murder in Australia in modern times in terms of the number of victims. Yet to date there has been: -no coronial inquiry or inquest -no trial at which the prosecution evidence was put to the test -no subsequent public inquiry of any kind Right handed vs Left Handed shooters The shooter that shot the victims in the Broad Arrow Cafe shot right handed, and from the hip. Meaning he did not take aim down the sights. This is incredibly difficult for someone to do, especially someone with no military or tactical experience. “Eighteen of the first twenty dead in the Broad Arrow Cafe died from single shots to the head, all fired by the marksman from his right hip in less than 90 seconds”, as described by Prosecutor Damian Bugg. “The gunman was right-handed and held the rifle about 3 inches above the hip whilst shooting.” -Graham Collyer - Port Arthur Massacre Survivor Recount [http://archive.is/dWcV6 ] [https://web.archive.org/web/20010508013225/http://www.shootersnews.addr.com/cttranscript.htm ] Excerpts from the transcript of interviews between detectives and Martin Bryant: DETECTIVE: When you practiced your shooting, did you, where did you hold the gun? MARTIN BRYANT: Up like this, on my left DETECTIVE: So if you held a gun, you would pull the trigger with your a finger on your left hand? MARTIN BRYANT: Yeah that’s right, yeah DETECTIVE: Oh right. And uh, did you ever practice shooting from the hip? MARTIN BRYANT: No, never DETECTIVE: Never? [https://wikileaks.org/wiki/Martin_Bryant_complete_interview ], [https://au.news.yahoo.com/transcript-martin-bryant-31053724.html ] On left: Bryant describes how he holds and shoots a rifle during the police interview. The Shooter’s Ability In 1998, Wound Ballistics Review pointed out that the Port Arthur incident: "...is unique in relation to the wounds for several reasons. Twice as many people were killed as injured (the reverse normally being true)." What's more, the Broad Arrow Café gunman managed to shoot the first 19 out of 20 people dead with single accurate shots to the head, fired from his right hip. Some researchers maintain that Bryant, who was an amateur shooter with virtually no shooting experience whatsoever, would have entirely lacked the skills to carry out such a feat. A powerful case has been made to this effect by Perth researcher Joe Vialls (now deceased), based on the fact that amateur shooters generally achieve a much lower KIR (killed-to-injured ratio) than did the Broad Arrow Café shooter. In an enclosed space like the Broad Arrow Café, targets would have to be shot in a careful sequence with split-second timing to maximise the kill rate. Yet the Broad Arrow Café gunman managed a kill rate well above that required of a fully trained soldier—an impossible task for a man like Bryant, with an IQ in the mid-60s and his total lack of military training. Vialls concluded that the shooter was a military-trained marksman who would probably rank among the top 10 or 20 shooters in the world. Brigadier Ted Serong, former head of Australian forces in Vietnam, was just as impressed. In 1999, Serong—who explained that his eyes had first been opened by the "astonishing proportion of killed to wounded"—told Melbourne newspaper the Age: "There was an almost satanic accuracy to that shooting performance. Whoever did it is better than I am, and there are not too many people around here better than I am." Vialls wrote: "The shooter in the Broad Arrow Café at Port Arthur demonstrated all of the qualities of a trained counterterrorist marksman but made no amateur mistakes. Always in motion and point-shooting from the right hip with devastating accuracy, he killed twenty of the occupants with single shots to the head and wounded twelve more, firing a total of only 29 rounds. Using known techniques reported by witnesses, he ensured his own safety from attack by turning on the spot and staying outside grappling range. It was an awesome display of expertise, even by special forces standards." [http://www.despatch.cth.com.au/Misc/martinbryant/MartinBryant1.html] [Dutton, Gerard (Sgt) (Ballistics Section, Hobart Tasmania Police) et al., "A Review of the Wounding Effects of the Colt AR-15 and FN-FAL Rifles used by Martin Bryant in the Port Arthur Shooting Incident, April 26, 1996, Tasmania, Australia", Wound Ballistics Review 3(4) 1998.] The lack of DNA evidence, despite the shooter eating a meal before the attack. It is commonly known, that in the official report, the shooter “ate a meal and drank from a can of soft drink” and even talked to people sitting nearby while having his meal, before conducting the attack. No DNA evidence was ever presented to Bryant during interview, or in any court procedures. Forensic Detective Sgt. Dutton later admitted to the media that there was no forensic evidence to place Martin Bryant at the Broad Arrow Cafe. No finger prints, no DNA, no blood splatter. Was none collected? Or knowing the outcome of the trial before hand maybe they just didn't bother to collect any. [https://web.archive.org/web/20010508013225/http://www.shootersnews.addr.com/ cttranscript.htm ] [http://archive.is/cuVio] [ https://www.britannica.com/event/Port-Arthur-Massacre] Physical Description of Bryant vs The Shooter Mr Laycock, a previous owner of the Broad Arrow cafe, knew Martin Bryant well enough because he, and his benefactor Mrs Harvey, would often take tea in his cafe and she would buy him gifts in the store. Several statements have been made by various witnesses, and we have copies of them all, which cancel out all those who think they saw Bryant but, instead, actually saw the real gunman wearing a wig. See image. Also important to note that On 30th April the Hobart Mercury printed an old photo of Martin Bryant on the front page. This was illegal because at that stage some of the witnesses had not yet been asked to identify the killer, and the photo could have affected the memories of the witnesses. When one witness was asked to describe the clothing worn by the gunman, she described the clothing on the old photo instead of what the gunman had worn. The Mercury newspaper was not prosecuted for breaking the law. Graham Collyer was shot in the neck inside the cafe. He describes the shooter as having "a lot of acne, a pitted face." In contrast, Martin has a smooth, creamy complexion. Graham's witness statement: [http:// portarthurinquiry.blogspot.com/ 2019/04/] Another witness, Rebecca McKenna, got a good look at the man's face . Who describes the shooters skin as “freckley”, which corroborates the statement by that of Graham Collyer who, as we saw, stated that the shooter's complexion was acne- scarred. However, Bryant's complexion is perfectly smooth, [http://www.despatch.cth.com.au/ Misc/martinbryant/ MartinBryant1.html] Evidence remains under lock and key for 75 years. The evidence from the massacre was given an “E75” clearance. Meaning that all the evidence collected or reviewed, is sealed for 75 years, and only the minister of police can view it. When Senator David Lleyonhjelm tried to get this overturned, he was quickly shut down. [http://portarthurinquiry.blogspot.com/2019/04/ ] Martin Bryants IQ and retardation. When leaving school in 1983, Bryant was assessed for a disability pension by a psychiatrist who wrote: "Cannot read or write. Does a bit of gardening and watches TV... Only his parents' efforts prevent further deterioration. In an examination after the massacre, forensic psychiatrist Ian Joblin found Bryant to be borderline mentally disabled, with an I.Q. of 66, equivalent to an 11-year-old. How does a man, with the IQ of an 11yo, plan such an attack and then kill so many people with tactical military precision? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Bryant#Psychological_and_psychiatric_assessments] [Shedding light on Port Arthur killer". The Age. Melbourne. 29 March 2006. Retrieved 8 December 2008.] Sale of the Broad Arrow Cafe to the Govt. in 1995 “Also, in June 1995, owner Jim Laycock sold the Broad Arrow Café to the Tasmanian government. This, in an age of privatisation, seems to have been an extremely unusual case of acquisition by government of the kind of business normally considered the preserve of private enterprise. The government, which took over the building on 1 July 1995, then proceeded to refurbish it— presumably to create the perfect environment for the kind of massacre being planned. The work included the insertion of a new door to the rear of the building—the very door which infamously failed to operate on the day of the massacre. Note how the building only had 2 potential exits. The door the shooter used, and the door that opened inwards, towards the room, which victims would've been stacked up against trying to escape.” [https://books.google.com.au/books? id=iLt4OYwyt68C&pg=PA82&lpg=PA82&dq=sale+of+broad+arrow+cafe+to+govt&source=bl&o ts=q7LKcAt5Pm&sig=ACfU3U3NjF2pTn8ffak5CdXlDiDuuNL7eQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKE wiz1_T2wunoAhWqxTgGHQ76D2gQ6AEwEHoECAwQKQ#v=onepage&q=sale%20of%20broad %20arrow%20cafe%20to%20govt&f=false ] [https://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/Martin_bryant ] Design and Construction of a 22 person body truck. A particularly damning piece of evidence is the fact that in 1995 the Tasmanian government ordered a mortuary vehicle that was capable of carrying 22 bodies at once.