The most treacherous twist in the entire saga of the Telstra arbitration was not merely the shocking fact that the Telstra board authorised a staggering $400 million default payment to Murdoch and FOX—funds siphoned from the public purse—despite knowing Telstra would never meet the rollout timeline. It was not just the appalling dismissal of five directors who bravely opposed this payout, a swift act of retaliation by the government. The more insidious betrayal was unfolding in the shadows, far from public scrutiny.
Behind the scenes, the COT arbitrator, the Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman, and the TIO-appointed Arbitration Project Manager wielded extraordinary power over the evidence, deciding which pieces would see the light of day in the arbitration process and which would be buried in obscurity. Only a tiny fraction of the extensive documentation we submitted ever reached the arbitration proceedings; the majority was systematically concealed, crippling each COT case long before it had the chance to be heard.
The final act of betrayal was equally disheartening: three of those four entities intentionally withheld this crucial evidence from Laurie James, the 1996 President of the Institute of Arbitrators Australia, who was preparing to investigate my claims. The evidence, detailed in The First Remedy Pursued file, reveals the deliberate effort to keep the truth from James, ensuring that the cover-up remained intact and leaving me in the same precarious position I find myself in today.
This is the corruption that carved a pathway for Rupert Murdoch and FOX to thrive without consequence. This is the rot permeating the system that made the $400 million payout not just possible, but seemingly inevitable. Readers must grasp this dark underbelly before they turn the page to the next chapter of this distressing narrative.
The ongoing telephone faults and Australia’s billing failures were not minor glitches; they were symptoms of a system so compromised, so deliberately neglected, that the consequences became catastrophic. It was so serious that Telstra, the government, and the arbitration machinery chose concealment over accountability, and that decision set the stage for everything that followed, including the Murdoch/FOX scandal.
Pre-Murdoch/FOX Escalation — Government Validation Buried
Before examining the Murdoch–FOX scandal, visitors must understand one brutal truth: the Australian Government had already validated my claims before my arbitration even began. I did not receive a copy of the official findings AUSTEL’s Adverse Findings, points 2 to 212, until November 23, 2007, twelve years after my arbitration ended. These findings were completed on March 4, 1994, just six weeks before I signed the arbitration agreement on April 21, 1994. In other words, the government already knew my telephone service was defective, the faults were real, Telstra had misled me, and my claims were valid. Yet, I was forced into a 13-month arbitration, incurring over $300,000 in professional fees to prove something the government had already established.
Dark, Treacherous Lead‑In to the Murdoch/FOX Saga
On one of the fateful days between April 7 and 9, 1994, just a fortnight before I signed the arbitration agreement, I was summoned to AUSTEL’s bunker-like office on Queens Road in Melbourne. The atmosphere was tense, filled with an unspoken urgency as Ronin Davey, the Chairman of AUSTEL (now known as ACMA), and the General Manager of Consumer Affairs sat before me, their expressions serious and focused.
By that point, they had been receiving evidence from me since June 4, 1993. This evidence laid bare a troubling reality: Australia was grappling with a systemic network failure. The issues extended far beyond the main copper network, permeating the 008/1800 free-call service as well. These faults were not minor inconveniences; they were severe enough that callers often couldn't connect at all. And when they did manage to get through, the calls were often accompanied by erroneous charges, adding insult to injury.
AUSTEL was acutely aware of the gravity of the situation. They understood that Telstra’s network was on the brink of collapse and that the faults were not only genuine but also widespread and potentially dangerous to consumers.
During our meeting, they made a request that would weigh heavily on my conscience. They asked me to covertly gather and share any information I could uncover during the arbitration process, information they insisted would be “in the public interest.” This request echoed my earlier cooperation with the Australian Federal Police when Telstra was caught intercepting my telephone conversations and fax transmissions. Driven by a sense of duty and pride, I agreed to their proposition, completely unaware that the government was stealthily plotting to betray me in the most devastating way possible.
When the arbitrator finally delivered his findings, the proceedings felt rushed and unjust. He did so without allowing his technical consultants the critical time they had formally requested on April 30, 1995, to properly investigate the faults I had reported. In a shocking twist, AUSTEL later discovered the billing problems that had remained unaddressed, yet allowed Telstra to quietly rectify them on October 16, 1995, five months after my arbitration had concluded. This action effectively stripped me of my legal right to challenge Telstra on matters that the arbitration process had never investigated.
This entire thread weaves directly into the intricate web of the Murdoch and FOX scandal. When the government realised that establishing the systemic nature of my faults would unveil the widespread telecommunications problems plaguing Telstra, problems intricately linked to the staggering $400 million payout related to Murdoch and FOX, they knew they could not afford to let me succeed. The truth was a dangerous adversary they could not allow to surface. So, in their desperate attempt to protect their interests, they chose to destroy me instead, burying the evidence beneath layers of deception and neglect.
Understanding this treachery is crucial; it forms the dark foundation underlying the Murdoch/FOX narrative. The reader must grasp this unsettling reality before continuing to read this website homepage.
I am again highlighting SENATE official Hansard – Parliament of Australia, at points 10 and 11, dated 25 June 1997, from the official Hansard (page 5164) so that readers can view them alongside the Communications Commissioner's findings attached above (AUSTEL’s Adverse Findings). The two statements in the Senate Hansard confirm that the government did not demand explanations regarding why the Telstra Board treated Murdoch and FOX differently from other Australian citizens. These citizens were forced into complex and costly arbitration and court cases to access the same telephone system that Murdoch and FOX were awarded $400 million for not receiving.
On page 5164 of the official SENATE official Hansard – Parliament of Australia, two critical questions are raised in the Senate at points 10 and 11, noting:
10. "Telstra's CEO and Board have been aware of this deception since 1992. They have had ample time and opportunity to reform policies and reduce labour costs in order to fulfil their cable rollout commitments, thereby positioning Telstra favourably for the impending share issue. Instead, they chose deception, misinforming their Minister, their appointed auditors, and the owners of their stock—the Australian taxpayers. Because they refused to address the Telecommunications Agreement (TA) issue, high labour costs persisted, and Telstra ultimately fell short of its cable rollout commitment to Foxtel. This oversight will cost Telstra at least $400 million in compensation to News Corp and/or Foxtel, in addition to significant losses incurred when Telstra's stock is issued at a much lower price than it would have achieved had the company acted responsibly."
11. "Not only did Telstra fail to act with responsibility, but it also derelicted its duty of care to its shareholders. The ultimate victims of this negligence are the taxpayers, along with the thousands of employees who are likely to face layoffs when Telstra finally meets its rollout target—cabling over 4 million households, or 2.5 million households, assuming Telstra’s CEO complies with directives from the Minister."
What you see here is just the beginning of this Murdoch / FOX story which follows below.
At 82, I find myself reflecting on the significant and troubling events that have shaped my life, particularly those surrounding my health. On 30 September 2026, I face a pivotal moment when the spent battery in my pacemaker — an essential device that has kept my heart beating steadily — will be removed and replaced with a new one. This new battery is designed to last between seven to ten years, yet I am acutely aware that I may not live to see another replacement.
With unwavering conviction, I assert that my two heart attacks, which drastically altered the course of my life, were not mere unfortunate accidents of biology. Instead, they were the direct and devastating result of the coordinated actions of four individuals: Dr. Hughes, Warwick Smith, John Pinnock, and John Rundell. These men orchestrated a campaign of deception against me — a campaign marked by a web of lies, sustained misinformation, and deliberate slander that unfolded before, during, and after the arbitration processes in 1994 and 1995.
The severity and intent of their misconduct transcended mere professional negligence; it manifested as an assault characterized by treachery. Their actions were calculated and malicious, far exceeding the boundaries of acceptable behavior and crossing into the realm of betrayal. I need this story told and retold, and widely shared across platforms and media. I want it to be hammered into public consciousness, dragged through every conceivable avenue, and repeated relentlessly until it becomes impossible to deny the truth.
I wholeheartedly welcome anyone who believes they can convey this narrative more effectively than I have done here or in my publication, *The Arbitraitor*. There will be no copyright restrictions, nor will there be any limitations on the use of the material found on absentjustice.com. My goal is unequivocal: to shine a glaring light on how these four men—whom I consider blaggards—ensured that my claims of gross misconduct were never investigated by the Institute of Arbitrators & Mediators Australia. They cloaked their actions in a veneer of procedural respectability, all the while being acutely aware of the harm they inflicted and the truth they actively concealed.
INTRODUCTION
I am 82 years of age, and on 30 September 2026 I will have the spent battery cut from my chest and replaced with a new one in my pacemaker — a device expected to last seven to ten years. I will almost certainly be gone before the next replacement is due. That is the timeline I live with now.
And I state this without hesitation, without doubt, without the slightest tremor of uncertainty: both of my heart attacks were not born from age, nor fate, nor misfortune. They were born from betrayal — from the corrupt, government‑endorsed arbitration process that was supposed to deliver justice, and from the men who poisoned it.
Dr Hughes. Warwick Smith. John Pinnock. John Rundell.
These four men — through deception, through lies, through calculated slander — attacked my character before, during, and after the 1994–1995 arbitration. Their conduct was not administrative failure. It was premeditated treachery. It was bureaucratic violence. It was the kind of corruption that does not simply ruin a process — it ruins a life.
I want this story told in as many ways as possible — hammered into daylight, dragged through every alley, repeated until no one can pretend they didn’t hear it. And I won’t challenge a single soul who thinks they can write it better than I have here, or in my book The Arbitraitor. There will be no challenge on copyright, no copyright issues in any form concerning the use of the material on absentjustice.com.
I emphasise again: my aim is to expose what these four blackguards — Hughes, Smith, Pinnock and Rundell — did to ensure the Institute of Arbitrators & Mediators Australia never exposed my claims of gross misconduct. They buried the truth because the truth would have buried them.
Whoever reads this introduction, I ask you to send this website to every lawyer and arbitrator in your country. Let them examine what I have written. Let them assess the exhibits. And let them decide — through the contact page on this site — where they believe the COT Cases story should be valued on its merit.
Read on.
