Learn about horrendous crimes, unscrupulous criminals, and corrupt politicians and lawyers who control the legal profession in Australia. Shameful, hideous, and treacherous are just a few words that describe these lawbreakers.

🕳️ Systemic Corruption Beneath Telstra’s Monopoly
 

Until the late 1990s, the Australian government held complete ownership of the nation's telephone network through the communications carrier, Telecom, now privatised and rebranded as Telstra. During this era, Telecom wielded an unchallenged monopoly over communications, allowing the network to decay into a shadow of its former self. Rather than address the glaring failures in service, the government-sanctioned arbitration process devolved into a treacherous game —an uneven battle in which claimants were systematically ground down. Many individuals poured hundreds of thousands of dollars into their claims against Telstra, only to see their pleas for justice fall on deaf ears.

This orchestrated neglect amounted to a betrayal of trust—crimes were committed against ordinary citizens, and their integrity was ruthlessly undermined. With livelihoods shattered and millions lost, mental health deteriorated under the weight of an unjust system that rewarded deception and cruelty. Those who orchestrated these acts of corruption remain entrenched in positions of power, their treachery hidden beneath layers of bureaucratic secrecy, while our story languishes in the shadows.

The corruption embedded within the government-sanctioned Casualties of Telstra (COT) arbitrations represents a dark chapter in our history. While the government turned a blind eye, the charade of fairness concealed a sinister reality. Rather than resolving the longstanding telephone and fax issues that have plagued countless businesses, the government’s endorsement merely perpetuated them, leaving operators trapped in a cycle of frustration and despair. 

Despite the COT Cases pouring hundreds of thousands of dollars into a flawed arbitration process, the outcome was not justice but a more bottomless financial quagmire. Most, if not all, of these businesses emerged from the ordeal in a far worse state than when they had begun, victims of a system designed to fail them. It reeks of unethical complicity —a betrayal of trust by those in power who turned a deaf ear to the cries of desperate business owners, all while profiting from their misfortune.

Call for Justice

A Working Phone: My Battle for Justice

 

My name is Alan Smith, and this is the story of my battle with a telecommunications giant and the Australian Government. Since 1992, this battle has twisted and turned through elected governments, government departments, regulatory bodies, the judiciary, and the telecommunications behemoth Telstra—or Telecom, as it was known when this story began. The quest for justice continues to this day.

My story began in 1987, when I decided that my life at sea—where I had spent the previous 20 years—was over. I needed a new, land-based occupation to carry me through to retirement and beyond. Of all the places I had visited around the world, I chose to make Australia my home.

Hospitality was my calling, and I had always dreamed of running a school holiday camp. So imagine my delight when I saw the Cape Bridgewater Holiday Camp and Convention Centre advertised for sale in The Age. Nestled in rural Victoria, near the small maritime port of Portland, it seemed perfect. I conducted what I believed was thorough due diligence to ensure the business was sound—or at least, all the due diligence I knew to perform. Who would have thought I needed to check whether the phones worked?

Within a week of taking over the business, I knew I had a problem. Customers and suppliers were telling me they had tried to call but couldn’t get through.

That’s right—I had a business to run, but the phone service was, at best, unreliable, and at worst, completely absent. Naturally, we lost business as a result.

The Camp was profoundly reliant on phone communication. It was our vital link to city dwellers eager to connect with our services. One of our most significant oversights—blinded by the charm of this coastal haven—was failing to investigate the existing telephone system. At the time, mobile coverage was virtually nonexistent, and business was conducted through traditional means—not online, and certainly not by email. We soon discovered we were tethered to an antiquated telephone exchange, installed more than 30 years earlier and designed specifically for 'low-call-rate' areas. This outdated, unstaffed exchange had a pitiful capacity of just eight lines.

During a typical week, the picturesque Cape Bridgewater was home to 66 residential families—not including those who used their coastal retreats to escape the bustle of city life. This created a significant challenge, especially considering many of these families had children. The eight service lines struggled to support a growing census of 130 adults and children. By the time a modern Remote Control Module (RCM) was finally installed in August 1991, twelve teenagers had been added to the mix, bringing the total population to 144.

We stepped into this complex landscape of limited connectivity and coastal beauty with ambition and optimism. The Camp was more than a business—it was a dream made real. A serene retreat where the stress of city life could dissolve into the ocean mist. But as we quickly learned, dreams need infrastructure to survive.

Our phone lines became both our lifeline and our most significant obstacle. Booking inquiries, supply orders, emergency calls—even simple conversations with clients—all had to pass through those eight fragile channels. During peak times, the lines were constantly engaged. Guests complained they couldn’t reach us. Suppliers missed confirmations. Opportunities slipped through our fingers like sand.

And so, my saga began—a long, painful quest to secure working phone service. Along the way, I received some compensation for business losses and many promises that the problem had been resolved. It never was. I sold the business in 2002, and the owners who followed me suffered the same fate.

Other independent business owners, similarly affected by poor telecommunications, joined me on this journey. We became known as the Casualties of Telecom—the COT cases. All we’ve ever wanted is for Telecom/Telstra to acknowledge our problems, fix them, and compensate us for our losses. A working phone—is that really too much to ask?

We initially called for a full Senate investigation into Telecom and these issues. Instead, we were offered an alternative: arbitration. It seemed like a fair and reasonable way to resolve the problem, so we agreed. At that early stage, we genuinely believed the technical issues preventing our phones from working would finally be addressed.

No such luck. Almost immediately, we began to suspect that something was wrong with the arbitration process. We had been promised access to the Telecom documents we needed to make our case. That promise was never fulfilled. To this day, we still do not have those documents.

My 3 February 1994 letter to Michael Lee, Minister for Communications (see Hacking-Julian Assange File No/27-A) and a subsequent letter from Fay Holthuyzen, assistant to the minister (see Hacking-Julian Assange File No/27-B), to Telstra’s corporate secretary, show that I was concerned that my faxes were being illegally intercepted.

An internal government memo, dated 25 February 1994, confirms that the minister advised me that the Australian Federal Police (AFP) would investigate my allegations of illegal phone/fax interception. (See Hacking-Julian Assange File No/28)

This internal, dated 25 February 1994, is a Government Memo confirming that the then-Minister for Communications and the Arts had written to advise that the Australian Federal Police (AFP) would investigate my allegations of illegal phone/fax interception. (AFP Evidence File No 4)

Worse still, we discovered that during the arbitration process, our fax lines were being illegally tapped. With the government against us, we lost.

To add insult to injury, we were tricked into signing a confidentiality clause that has hampered our efforts ever since. I may be breaching that clause by sharing this story—but what choice do I have?

The next chapter of our journey involved doing everything in our power to obtain the promised documents through the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act. We know the evidence exists—proof that the lines weren’t working and that they were never appropriately tested, despite agreed protocols. But to use that evidence, we must first obtain it.

So I ask you: are we imagining all this? Or has there truly been massive corruption and collusion among public servants, politicians, regulatory bodies, and Telstra itself—collusion that has protected a corporate giant at the expense of rural Australian businesses?

Remember to hover your mouse or cursor over the images as you scroll down the homepage.

🗡️Political Betrayal in the Wake of Telstra’s Privatisation
In July 2005, 14 desperate COT members gathered in Brisbane, hoping for relief from their plights, and met with Senator Barnaby Joyce. In that meeting, the senator was visibly shaken as he listened to their harrowing accounts of betrayal, yet he soon engaged in a deceitful game of his own. He struck a dubious agreement with the government. In exchange for his critical vote to pass the Telstra privatisation legislation, the government would agree to conduct an independent investigation into these 14 cases.

However, as soon as Senator Joyce cast the pivotal vote, Senator Helen Coonan, Minister for Communications on behalf of the Liberal Government, with the Liberal Party—having long played a duplicitous game with the National Party to maintain their grip on power—immediately reneged on their promise. Instead of delivering justice, they offered empty platitudes and a half-hearted compromise that left the COT members stranded once more. The government claimed they would assess the unresolved COT cases, but unbeknownst to Senator Joyce and the claimants, the evaluations would be conducted by none other than Telstra itself. It was a farce—like asking a thief to judge his own counsel when caught red-handed.

Now, as of 2025, Senator Joyce is no longer a senator, but he clings to a position within the National Party, hinting at potential defection to another party if they would accept him. But with a history marred by ethical failures, the Hon. Barnaby Joyce may soon come to know the pain and suffering he promised to resolve for the 14 COT claimants back in 2006. Approaching 2025, it is starkly apparent that their unresolved issues remain buried under a mountain of corruption and deceit.

David Lever, a government bureaucrat wielding the power to dictate the fate of my claims, found himself ensnared in a web of deceit with his treacherous accomplice, Nikki Vajrabukka. Her malice revealed itself when she shamelessly confessed to contacting David Quilty, a cunning and duplicitous Telstra Government Liaison Officer (AS 1042), on March 3, 2006. She sought his dark assistance to undermine my allegations, attempting to suffocate the truth before it could see the light of day.

My claims, which detailed three alarming instances of Telstra deliberately submitting false reports to fortify their arbitration defence, were met with a chilling, calculated dismissal. The depths of corruption reached new heights when David Quilty, having masterfully orchestrated this nefarious cover-up, was handsomely rewarded with a senior executive position within Telstra. Such an ascent is a testament to his loyalty to this deceitful organisation—a reward for concealing their malevolence.

Living with the knowledge of such treachery is maddening. It’s sickening to witness individuals cloaked in authority, yet utterly cowardly in their willingness to evade the consequences of their insidious actions. This entire affair oozes with malicious intent and reveals a system rigged to shield the corrupt at the expense of justice.

Now, consider the sinister scenario where David Quilty did find in my favour, acknowledging that Telstra had cunningly employed three false reports, thus perverting the course of justice. Why was I not informed of this damning conclusion as part of my 2006 Senator Joyce / Senator Coonan assessment process? Why was I denied the recompense I so justly deserved for the crimes inflicted upon me? And how is it that a man like David Quilty could ascend to such a prestigious position within Telstra if he had indeed condemned their actions? The stench of corruption lingers, and the betrayal is profound.

Read the full report covering this assessment process at → The eighth remedy pursued, and you will learn even more about how corrupt the Australian government's 2006 assessment process was. 

📜The Bureaucratic Shadow Government

On May 23, 2021, Peta Credlin—former advisor to Prime Minister Tony Abbott and now a prominent media figure—published a striking article in the Herald Sun titled:"...Beware The Pen Pusher Power - Bureaucrats need to take orders and not take charge."

Credlin warned of a growing imbalance in Australian governance, where unelected bureaucrats wield disproportionate influence. She wrote:

"Now that the Prime Minister is considering a wider public service reshuffle in the wake of the foreign affairs department's head, Finances Adamson, becoming the next governor of South Australia, it's time to scrutinise the faceless bureaucrats who are often more powerful in practice than the elected politicians."

"Outside of the Canberra bubble, almost no one knows their names. But take it from me, these people matter."

"When ministers turn over with bewildering rapidity, or are not "take charge" types, department secretaries and the deputy secretaries below them can easily become the de facto government of our country".  

"Since the start of 2013, across Labour and now Liberal governments, we’ve had five prime ministers, five treasurers, five attorneys-general, seven defence ministers, six education ministers, four health ministers and six trade Ministers."

Her words struck a chilling chord. I found the article frightening—because it was accurate. Credlin hit the bullseye. I’ve lived this reality. During my arbitration, I witnessed firsthand how these faceless bureaucrats operated—advising successive governments regardless of political stripe. The same individuals who shaped telecommunications policy under Hawke and Keating seamlessly transitioned to advising the Liberal government after its 1996 victory. A decade later, they were still entrenched.

These are the same bureaucrats who masqueraded as independent assessors in the Barnaby Joyce and Helen Coonan deal—an arrangement that collapsed disastrously, much like the Robodebt scandal → https://shorturl.at/7Wpuj. In both cases, innocent Australians bore the brunt while the bureaucrats slithered back into the shadows, waiting for the next saga to unfold.

If you’ve explored absentjustice.com, you’ll understand how deeply this corruption runs. Our story is not just about failed phone lines or broken promises—it’s about a system where unelected officials hold sway over elected leaders, and where accountability is a mirage.

Would you like help formatting this into a visual timeline or exhibit trail to mark the bureaucratic continuity across governments? That could amplify the impact even further.

🕱 The Moment the Mask Slipped

Why would one of Australia’s most respected lawyers, his KPMG-linked project manager, and the Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman conspire to deceive the President of the Institute of Arbitrators?” see "The first remedy pursued"

Chapter 5 Fraudulent Conduct

As you penetrate these opening paragraphs, a chilling question will undoubtedly arise: Why would government officials deliberately choose to enter into a convoluted and legalistic arbitration agreement—one surreptitiously crafted by the very lawyers for the defendants—rather than appointing an independent body, as our government and legal representatives cynically assured us? What sinister influence lurked within the government corridors to compel Dr Hughes, the chosen arbitrator, and Warwick Smith, the first Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman and the overseer of the supposed government-endorsed arbitration process, to unscrupulously abolish the $250,000 liability caps that had been a cornerstone of one of the four COT Cases, signed on April 8, 1994? Why were we, the beleaguered participants in COT Cases—including Ann Garms, Graham Schorer, and myself—forced into signing an altered agreement that stripped away these crucial liability caps? The pressure was unmistakably coercive: refuse to sign this nefariously modified document, and Dr Hughes and Warwick Smith would withdraw from the process entirely, leaving us isolated and powerless against an unforgiving system. 

Discrimination

This entire ordeal epitomises the most insidious form of corruption. Even more alarming, two months after we were compelled to accept these underhanded changes, the $250,000 liability caps were reinstated in the agreements of the remaining twelve COT Cases—a manoeuvre executed without our knowledge. These revamped agreements would become the standard for anyone in Australia attempting to arbitrate with Telstra. The original $250,000 liability caps were crucial, as they allowed claimants to pursue legal action against the arbitrators' consultants for gross negligence during the claim assessment process. Yet, as the evidence laid bare on this site demonstrates, negligence was not merely a possibility—it was a blatant reality that contaminated my experience and threatened our very pursuit of justice.

Dr Gordon Hughes, John Rundell, and John Pinnock—the second-appointed Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman—three men entrusted with integrity—collaborated to issue known false statements to Laurie James, then-President of the Institute of Arbitrators Australia. This wasn’t a misunderstanding. It was a coordinated strike, launched just as Mr James began investigating my evidence of fraud, bias, discrimination, and gross misconduct by all three.

Once you’ve read my Open Letter dated 25 September 2025 (see "The first remedy pursued"), you’ll begin to understand why this betrayal has weighed on me for thirty years. Living with the knowledge of what these three men did—and how the system shielded them—is a torment I wouldn’t wish on anyone.

⚖️ False Allegations and the Fabrication of Criminal Suspicion: A Legal Turning Point
In 1998, amidst a whirlwind of investigations into serious allegations of fraud, the Victoria Police Major Fraud Group seconded me to assist in a particularly high-profile case that had captured public attention. Barrister Sue Owens brought forth the allegations on behalf of four individuals entangled in the COT Cases arbitrations—Ann Garms, Graham Schorer, Ross Ploughmen, and Ralph Bova. Their claims painted a complex and troubling portrait of deceit and misconduct within the arbitration process.

🔥 Turning Point: The Rundell Accusation and the Brighton CIB Revelation
During a critical phase of my collaboration with the Major Fraud Group, I was blindsided by a deeply unsettling manoeuvre. John Rundell—formerly the Arbitration Project Manager overseeing my case from April 1994 to May 1995 and now representing KPMG—had sent a letter dated February 13, 1996, to Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman John Pinnock. In it, Rundell designated me as a suspect in an alleged incident of criminal damage involving his property in Brighton, Victoria.

The letter claimed that the Brighton Criminal Investigation Bureau (CIB) was either preparing to interview me or had already initiated inquiries. This accusation, unsubstantiated and never communicated directly to me, lingered ominously for nearly two years. By December 1998, I had not been contacted by police—raising serious concerns about whether this shadow of suspicion was deliberately cast to hinder my ability to assist the Major Fraud Group in their broader investigation into systemic misconduct.

Barrister Neil Jepson, recognising the gravity of the situation, contacted Brighton CIB directly. Their response was unequivocal: they had no record of me, no investigation was underway, and they had no knowledge of any alleged damage involving Mr Rundell’s property. I was not a suspect. I had never been a suspect.

This revelation exposed a disturbing truth: Rundell’s letter was not a legitimate legal notice—it was a strategic smear. I immediately informed John Pinnock and demanded that he notify the President of the Institute of Arbitrators, Australia. I made it clear that Dr Gordon Hughes had no authority to circulate Rundell’s letter, especially not under the pretence that I was a confirmed suspect. Yet Hughes had already supplied the letter to Laurie James, the Institute’s past President, with strict instructions that it not be shared with me.
I received no reply from Pinnock, Rundell, Hughes, or James. Their silence spoke volumes.

🖋️ A Pivotal Moment in the COT Chronology

I later discovered that Dr Gordon Hughes, the arbitrator appointed to my case, had sent a copy of Rundell’s 13 February 1996 letter to Laurie James, President of the Institute of Arbitrators Australia, instructing him not to disclose its contents to me. Feeling compelled to address the fallout from this troubling episode, I wrote to Dr Hughes seeking an apology for the correspondence he had forwarded. I emphasised that receiving this apology could be crucial in persuading the Institute to revisit its earlier dismissal of investigations into his conduct as arbitrator. Unfortunately, I received no response from Dr Hughes.

As you reflect on the troubling facts concerning Dr Gordon Hughes, John Rundell, and John Pinnock, consider the implications of what these three Australian citizens did—not only to me, but to many others across the country whose businesses collapsed or whose lives were irreparably damaged. Had these individuals come forward in 1995 and demanded an investigation into the conduct of the COT arbitrations, the outcomes might have been vastly different for all those affected by their silence and complicity..

But this is only the beginning, as the following twelve chapters below, titled "Telstra-Corruption-Freehill-Hollingdale & Page" to "The Promised Documents Never Arrived" show.

This moment marks the rupture. The mask of legitimacy slips, revealing the grotesque machinery beneath. If you continue to scroll, you’ll see how deep the rot goes—and why the COT story is not just mine, but a national reckoning waiting to happen.

🕷️ The Architects of Deceit: Australia’s Legal Underworld Unmasked
Descend into the abyss of Australia’s institutional corruption—a ruthless syndicate of bureaucrats, legal operatives, and political puppeteers who have weaponised the very systems meant to protect the innocent. This is not mere negligence. It is a calculated orchestration of betrayal, where the overseers of justice are the engineers of its demise.

These so-called investigators—tasked with exposing corruption—are in fact its architects. Their inquiries are grotesque performances, designed to suffocate truth beneath layers of procedural theatre and bureaucratic fog. Victims are not heard; they are buried. Their evidence is not examined; it is entombed.

The monstrous betrayal is laid bare in three separate investigations into my formal complaints lodged with the Institute of Arbitrators and Mediators Australia (IAMA) in 1996, 2000, and 2009 (Refer to "The eleventh remedy pursued".   Each probe revealed damning evidence of corruption by the arbitrator and the arbitration administrator, who simultaneously held the role of Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman. Yet between July and November 2009, despite receiving 23 bound spiral files of irrefutable evidence, the IAMA refused to act. Worse, they refused to return the files, even when I demanded they be handed to a mutually agreed-upon legal firm. That evidence is now publicly available in (Evidence File-1 and Evidence-File-2)

These individuals continue to practice law and arbitration in Australia and Hong Kong, shielded by a system designed to protect the powerful and silence those who have been betrayed. The very mechanisms of justice have been hollowed out and repurposed into a fortress of deceit.

Words like “shameful” and “treacherous” are feeble against the venom coursing through the COT arbitrations. This is not justice delayed—it is justice assassinated. The system is rigged, fortified against scrutiny, and cloaked in the false authority of legal process. It crushes dissent, buries truth, and perpetuates injustice with surgical precision

Telstra-Corruption-Freehill-Hollingdale & Page

Corrupt practices persisted throughout the COT arbitrations, flourishing in secrecy and obscurity. These insidious actions have managed to evade necessary scrutiny. Notably, the phone issues persisted for years following the conclusion of my arbitration, established to rectify these faults

Confronting Despair

The independent arbitration consultants demonstrated a concerning lack of impartiality. Instead of providing clear and objective insights, their guidance to the arbitrator was often marked by evasive language, misleading statements, and, at times, outright falsehoods.

Flash Backs – China-Vietnam

In 1967, Australia participated in the Vietnam War. I was on a ship transporting wheat to China, where I learned China was redeploying some of it to North Vietnam. Chapter 7, "Vietnam—Vietcong," discusses the link between China and my phone issues.

A Twenty-Year Marriage Lost

As bookings declined, my marriage came to an end. My ex-wife, seeking her fair share of our venture, left me with no choice but to take responsibility for leaving the Navy without adequately assessing the reliability of the phone service in my pursuit of starting a business.

Salvaging What I Could

Mobile coverage was nonexistent, and business transactions were not conducted online. Cape Bridgewater had only eight lines to service 66 families—132 adults. If four lines were used simultaneously, the remaining 128 adults would have only four lines to serve their needs.

Lies Deceit And Treachery

I was unaware of Telstra's unethical and corrupt business practices. It has now become clear that various unethical organisational activities were conducted secretly. Middle management was embezzling millions of dollars from Telstra.

An Unlocked Briefcase

On June 3, 1993, Telstra representatives visited my business and, in an oversight, left behind an unlocked briefcase. Upon opening it, I discovered evidence of corrupt practices concealed from the government, playing a significant role in the decline of Telstra's telecommunications network.

A Government-backed Arbitration

An arbitration process was established to hide the underlying issues rather than to resolve them. The arbitrator, the administrator, and the arbitration consultants conducted the process using a modified confidentiality agreement. In the end, the process resembled a kangaroo court.

Not Fit For Purpose

AUSTEL investigated the contents of the Telstra briefcases. Initially, there was disbelief regarding the findings, but this eventually led to a broader discussion that changed the telecommunications landscape. I received no acknowledgement from AUSTEL for not making my findings public.
&am

A Non-Graded Arbitrator

Who granted the financial and technical advisors linked to the arbitrator immunity from all liability regarding their roles in the arbitration process? This decision effectively shields the arbitration advisors from any potential lawsuits by the COT claimants concerning misconduct or negligence.<

The AFP Failed Their Objective

In September 1994, two officers from the AFP met with me to address Telstra's unauthorised interception of my telecommunications services. They revealed that government documents confirmed I had been subjected to these violations. Despite this evidence, the AFP did not make a finding.&am

The Promised Documents Never Arrived

In a February 1994 transcript of a pre-arbitration meeting, the arbitrator involved in my arbitration stated that he "would not determination on incomplete information.". The arbitrator did make a finding on incomplete information.

Chapter 1

Learn about government corruption and the dirty deeds used by the government to cover up these horrendous injustices committed against 16 Australian citizens

Chapter 2

Betrayal deceit disinformation duplicity falsehood fraud hypocrisy lying mendacity treachery and trickery. This sums up the COT government endorsed arbitrations.

Chapter 3

Ending bribery corruption means holding the powerful to account and closing down the systems that allows bribery, illicit financial flows, money laundering, and the enablers of corruption to thrive.

Chapter 4

Learn about government corruption and the dirty deeds used by the government to cover up these horrendous injustices committed against 16 Australian citizens. Government corruption within the public service affected most if not all of the COT arbitrations. 

Chapter 5

Corruption is contagious and does not respect sectoral boundaries. Corruption involves duplicity and reduces levels of morality and trust.

Chapter 6

Anti-corruption policies need to be used in anti-corruption reforms and strategy. Corruption metrics and corruption risk assessment is good governance

Chapter 7

Bribery and Corruption happens in the shadows, often with the help of professional enablers such as bankers, lawyers, accountants and real estate agents, opaque financial systems and anonymous shell companies that allow corruption schemes to flourish and the corrupt to launder their wealth.

Chapter 8

Corrupt practices in government and the results of those corrupt practices become problematic enough – but when that corruption becomes systemic in more than one operation, it becomes cancer that endangers the welfare of the world's democracy.

Chapter 9

Corruption in government, including non-government self-regulators, undermines the credibility of that government. It erodes the trust of its citizens who are left without guidance are the feel of purpose. Bribery and Corruption is cancer that destroys economic growth and prosperity. 

Chapter 10

The horrendous, unaddressed crimes perpetrated against the COT Cases during government-endorsed arbitrations administered by the Telecommunication Industry Ombudsman have never been investigated. 

Chapter 11

This type of skulduggery is treachery, a Judas kiss with dirty dealing and betrayal. This is dirty pool and crookedness and dishonest. This conduct fester’s corruption. It is as bad, if not worse than double-dealing and cheating those who trust you.&a

Chapter 12

Absentjustice.com - the website that triggered the deeper exploration into the world of political corruption, it stands shoulder to shoulder with any true crime story.