You can access my book 'Absent Justice' here → Order Now—it's Free. It presents a compelling narrative that addresses critical societal issues related to justice and equity within Australia's arbitration and mediation processes. If you see the value in the research and evidence behind this important work, consider supporting  Transparency International Australia! Your donation will help raise awareness about the injustices that impact our democracy. 

Learn about the horrendous crimes, unscrupulous criminals, and corrupt politicians and lawyers who control the seat of arbitration in Australia, as the following link suggests Chapter 11 - The eleventh remedy pursued. Shameful, hideous, and treacherous are just a few words that describe these lawbreakers. 

Until the early 1990s, before the rise of emails and the internet upended traditional communication, the Australian government maintained a treacherous grip on the nation’s telephone network through its monopolistic carrier, Telecom, now infamously known as Telstra. In this shadowy era, the government exhibited a chilling apathy toward the rapidly crumbling telecommunications infrastructure, allowing it to deteriorate into a state of alarming neglect.

But was this neglect merely an oversight, or was there something far more sinister lurking beneath the surface? Were the government’s actions part of an insidious scheme to keep ordinary citizens in the dark while their hard-earned tax dollars fed a shadowy, mafia-like network, profiting from the chaos? Throughout this time of decay, it came to light that Telstra union members were engaging in a web of corruption, scheming to siphon millions through bribery and extortion during the 1980s and 1990s—a reality starkly documented in official government Senate Hansard records.

By allowing Telstra’s crumbling copper wire system—the very lifeblood of Australia’s telecommunications infrastructure—to fall into disrepair, the government created an environment ripe for exploitation. During the days when maintenance was willfully ignored, Telstra’s technicians seized the chance to cash in, working weekends for triple pay, effectively profiting from their own negligence. This corrupt orchestration served only the interests of Telstra employees while ordinary Australians and small business owners were left to suffer the dire consequences, struggling to operate their telephone-dependent enterprises in a landscape fraught with instability.

The fallout was nothing short of catastrophic. Service quality plummeted, plunging countless Australians into a relentless nightmare of dropped calls, distorted voices, and unreliable connections. Isolation and frustration became the grim reality for many as their vital links to the outside world frayed under the weight of systemic negligence. In this web of corruption, the everyday citizen found themselves ensnared in a treacherous game, manipulated by those in power while their very livelihoods hung in the balance.

In desperation, four small business owners—each battling the severe fallout of Telstra's callousness—sought arbitration to voice their urgent grievances. What they encountered was a treacherous miscarriage of justice. The arbitration process was shrouded in a thick fog of corruption, marked by an abhorrent disregard for fairness and the rule of law. The arbitrator, seemingly colluding with Telstra, coldly dismissed their legitimate claims, which threatened the very survival of their businesses.

Rupert Murdoch -Telstra Scandal - Helen Handbury

Every Australian citizen must confront a grotesque reality: if Telstra indeed paid a staggering $400 million to Rupert Murdoch and Fox, as Senate Hansard suggests, then we are not merely talking about a transactional agreement—it is a flagrant cover-up of their failure to deliver on the promised National Broadband Network (NBN) cable fibre rollout. This shady arrangement raises grave questions about whose interests were truly protected in this corrupt alliance. Who among Telstra’s leadership condoned such duplicitous agreements, fully aware of the profound harm being inflicted upon the citizens they were meant to serve?

I must emphasise the murky implications of the situation outlined in points 10 and 11 on page 5164 of the SENATE official Hansard – Parliament of Australia, records. This document, published by the Parliament of Australia, reveals a troubling truth: Telstra and its board were fully aware that the company would not meet the imposed deadline for the rollout given to Rupert Murdoch and Fox. Yet, in what seems like a treacherous manoeuvre, the powerful board of Telstra proceeded to issue a lucrative contract to one of Australia’s most influential business conglomerates. This blatant disregard for Telstra’s immense wealth—a resource that rightfully belongs to every Australian citizen, especially since the company was entirely government-owned at the time the staggering $400 million deal was struck—raises profound and unsettling questions. If Telstra’s infrastructure was woefully inadequate to support the ambitious Murdoch/Fox cable rollout, why was $400 million funnelled to this consortium?

In a disturbing twist, consider the COT Cases, where countless business owners were left to suffer for years due to egregious and systemic failures in telecommunications brought about by Telstra. These individuals were coerced into paying exorbitant arbitration fees—often amounting to hundreds of thousands of dollars—merely to ensure that an arbitrator would pressure Telstra to correct its own dismal failures in service. If this scandalous treatment does not scream severe discrimination and favouritism, then what does? The dark undercurrents of this scenario paint a picture of a system rigged against the very citizens it is supposed to serve.

I believe you are taking the most appropriate course of action

The Canadian government ministers’ office wrote back on 7 July 1995, noting:

"In view of the facts of this situation, as I understand them, I believe you are taking the most appropriate course of action in contacting BCI directly with respect to the alleged errors in their test report, should you feel that they could assist you in your case."   

On June 29, 1995, the Canadian government expressed serious concerns regarding the actions of Telstra's legal team, Freehill Hollingdale & Page (now known as Herbert Smith Freehills Melbourne). They were accused of providing falsified test results from Bell Canada International Inc., which were misleading and untruthful. These deceptive results claimed that 13,590 test calls had successfully navigated the Portland/Cape Bridgewater telephone exchanges over a five-day testing period. This system was crucial for the operation of my business, and astonishingly, it reported a success rate beyond all expectations (Refer to Telstra's Falsified BCI Report 2).

The main issue is that the equipment mentioned in the formal report by the BCI, specifically the CCS7 monitoring device, could not be set up at either the Cape Bridgewater or Portland exchanges. The closest exchange capable of facilitating this device is in Warrnambool, 112 kilometres away. Therefore, where were the 13,590 BCI test calls sent? They were not generated into either the Portland or Cape Bridgewater exchanges.

When it was revealed that arbitration witness statements allegedly prepared by Ian Joblin, a clinical psychologist appointed by Freehill Hollingdale & Page/Herbert Smith Freehills Melbourne on behalf of Telstra to assess my mental health, may have been altered, concerns arose. These statements were based on the Bell Canada Tests provided by Freehill's, which were known to be fundamentally flawed. Despite the assertion that Ian Joblin's signature was on the witness statement, no signature was present. Wayne Maurice Condon from Freehill Hollingdale & Page claimed that it was included. As a result, the administrator of the arbitration process initiated an investigation and wrote to Telstra seeking confirmation of these discrepancies, as illustrated in his 21 March 19967 letter below.

On 21 March 1997, twenty-two months after the conclusion of my arbitration, John Pinnock (the second appointed Telecommunication Industry Ombudsman in his role as administrator to my arbitration), wrote to Telstra's arbitration liaison officer Ted Benjamin (see File 596 - AS-CAV Exhibits 589 to 647) asking: 

1. ...any explanation for the apparent discrepancy in the attestation of the witness statement of Ian Joblin .
2. ...were there any changes made to the Joblin statement originally sent to Dr Hughes  compared to the signed statement?" 

The fact that Telstra's lawyer, Maurice Wayne Condon of Freehill Hollingdale & Page, signed the witness statement without the psychologist's signature highlights the significant influence Telstra lawyers have over the arbitration legal system in Australia.

The Canadian government was left reeling in shock as it unearthed a disturbing revelation involving the law firm once known as Freehill Hollingdale & Page, now trading as Herbert Smith Freehills Melbourne. It became apparent that one of their attorneys, Wayne Maurice Condon, had the audacity to take the stand and testify under oath about witnessing the signature of clinical psychologist Ian Joblin on a crucial witness statement. Yet, in a twisted turn of fate, it was discovered that this signature was nothing more than a phantom—absent from the document entirely.

Such a blatant act of deceit is unequivocally condemned in Canadian arbitration proceedings, which are meant to be bastions of integrity and transparency. However, in the shadowy realm of the COT Cases—a series of government-sanctioned arbitrations entangling public corporations—a darker truth looms. Here, the rules are bent, the standards of conduct deteriorate, and the line between right and wrong blurs in a treacherous dance of corruption where unethical behaviour is not just tolerated but seemingly endorsed. This disturbing landscape raises grave concerns about the very foundations of justice and the lengths to which some entities will go to secure their own interests.

 

 

 

 

Institute of Arbitrators Mediators Australia (IAMA) 

In a state of desperation, four small business owners—each battered by the devastating fallout of Telstra's negligence—sought arbitration to voice their urgent grievances. This request for justice was not an isolated incident; soon, twelve more cases found themselves ensnared in the same arbitration process with the same dubious arbitrator. These twelve, like the original four, faced a disheartening outcome, and I was among them.

 

What unfolded for these sixteen Australian citizens was a shocking miscarriage of justice. The arbitration process was shrouded in a thick veil of corruption, revealing a sinister disregard for fairness and the rule of law. The arbitrator, seemingly in collusion with Telstra, coldly swept aside their legitimate claims of ongoing telephone issues. He insidiously asserted that these problems had been resolved, despite overwhelming evidence from his own technical arbitration consultants, who indicated in writing that the ongoing faults had not been diagnosed and that this critical aspect of the arbitration had been left frustratingly unresolved.

 

In 2009, I provided new arbitration evidence to the IAMA, which had not been available during their first investigation in 1996 or their second investigation in 2001. On 5th July 2009, the President of the IAMA, the Hon. Michael Kirby (Retired Chief Justice), wrote to inform me that the IAMA's CEO would contact me. In July 2009, Paul Crowley, CEO of the IAMA Ethics and Affairs Committee, agreed to review the new evidence. Due to the large amount of evidence, I released it gradually at the request of the IAMA between July and November 2009. However, fifteen months after the submission, the Ethics and Affairs Committee of IAMA did not take a position regarding the presented material. Furthermore, they have refused to issue a written decision in favour of or against the evidence provided. The IAMA has also declined to return 23 spiral-bound folders of evidence and 1,200 supporting exhibits → The eleventh remedy pursued).

 

What initially prompted the IAMA to investigate my claims against the arbitrator was a mini report that I submitted to them. However, Dr Gordon Hughes had promised not to make a finding if our claims were incomplete. Despite this, Dr. Hughes concluded all three COT cases without reviewing the evidence that had not been provided. He allowed only Graham Schorer, a former client of Dr Hughes who had previously defended Mr Schorer against Telstra in the Australian Federal Court two years prior, to present information in these cases—something I was unaware of at the time (Refer to Chapter 3 - Conflict of Interest).  I believed that this conflict of interest, along with the failure to seek the Bell Canada International (BCI) raw data, prompted the IAMA to agree to investigate Dr. Hughes.

 

 

https://shorturl.at/JxvoS,

Despite the egregious actions taken during these arbitrations—actions that would set off alarm bells in any ethical framework—the Australian government and the Australian Federal Police stood by, powerless or unwilling to confront the corruption at play. In the shadows of this sinister arrangement, Telstra and its accomplices continued to operate with impunity, leaving affected individuals without justice or recourse.

On 26 September 1997, at the beginning of the Senate Committee hearing that prompted the Senate to start their investigation, the second appointed Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman, John Pinnock, who took over from Warwick Smith, formally addressed a Senate estimates committee refer to page 99 COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA - Parliament of Australia and Prologue Evidence File No 22-D). He noted:

“In the process leading up to the development of the arbitration procedures – the claimants were told clearly that documents were to be made available to them under the FOI Act.

“Firstly, and perhaps most significantly, the arbitrator had no control over that process, because it was a process conducted entirely outside the ambit of the arbitration procedures.”

There is no amendment attached to any agreement, signed by the first four COT members, allowing the arbitrator to conduct those particular arbitrations entirely outside the ambit of the arbitration procedure, and neither was it stated that he would have no control over the process once we had signed those individual agreements. How can the arbitrator and TIO continue to hide under the tainted, altered confidentiality agreement (see below) when that agreement did not mention that the arbitrator would have no control over the arbitration because the process would be conducted 'entirely' outside the agreed procedures?

During her first visit to my holiday camp, Helen Handbury, sister of the powerful media mogul Rupert Murdoch, approached me with what she claimed was sincere support after reading my manuscript, *Ring for Justice*. While her charming demeanour suggested genuine interest, lurking beneath the surface was a disquieting memory of Senator Kim Carr’s unsettling remarks about the same manuscript. This backdrop of unease serves as fertile ground for the controversial website, absentjustice.com.

 

Helen fervently wished for her influential brother—an unyielding titan in the media landscape, known for wielding his immense power to shape narratives—to read my work. This encounter left me with a haunting question: Did she truly understand the insidious implications surrounding Rupert's connections with the notorious Telstra Corporation? This corporation has become synonymous with corruption, siphoning millions from the pockets of everyday Australians. At that time, Telstra was not just a distant entity; it was a malevolent force actively misleading consumers and government regulators like AUSTEL (now known as ACMA). They orchestrated a campaign of deception regarding my ongoing billing disputes, which dragged on for over a decade—pitting ordinary citizens against a corrupt system that thrived on exploitation from 1988 to 1999. Frank Blount, who presided as CEO of Telstra, shockingly admitted in his 2000 book, *Managing in Australia*, that he was acutely aware of systemic billing flaws within Telstra. Yet, he and the board chose to conceal this damaging information during the government-endorsed COT arbitrations, showcasing the depth of their unethical practices. (Refer to pages 132 and 133 →  https://www.qbd.com.au › managing-in-australia › fran... 

 

The injustices outlined in my manuscript weave a damning narrative that exposes the sinister layers of Telstra's operations, revealing how they preyed upon trusting consumers. It was unsettling to witness Helen, with unabashed eagerness, encouraging her brother to publish a work that could potentially unveil the duplicitous treacheries committed by Telstra—a corporation that exploited everyday Australians while enriching its executives without remorse.

 

 

A pivotal moment unfolded during my conversation with Helen Handbury after her second visit to my cosy holiday camp, following her thoughtful and insightful reading of my manuscript. As we sat across from each other, enveloped in an atmosphere of warmth and familiarity, I felt compelled to voice my deep concern regarding her brother, Rupert Murdoch—a figure whose considerable influence casts a long shadow over Telstra. This telecommunications giant plays a significant role in the lives of countless Australians. I articulated my doubts about whether he had even laid eyes on my manuscript and whether acknowledging my claims of discrimination would be too much to expect under such circumstances.

 

In response, Helen reassured me, her tone calm and soothing. She revealed that she had not yet forwarded my manuscript to him, which alleviated some of the anxiety I had been carrying. She explained that her return to the holiday camp was solely to retrieve an item of clothing she had inadvertently left behind during her first visit. This minor yet personal detail added a genuine touch to our encounter, highlighting the connection we had developed over our conversations.

 

For years, I have harboured the belief that if Rupert Murdoch had taken even a moment to read my manuscript, I would likely have received a formal notice from his company—an official communication indicating they did not wish to pursue any further correspondence. This lingering thought occupies a significant space in my mind, shaping my understanding of the intricate dynamics at play in this complex and often disheartening situation.

 

 

 

My once-owned Holiday Camp, where Helen Handbury and her friends stayed  

 

Helen's response resonated deeply within me; she thoughtfully questioned whether Rupert Murdoch could truly remain indifferent to the plight of the COT Cases, especially if he fully comprehended the immense struggles, frustrations, and emotional toll we had endured. We fought valiantly against an obstructive system, pouring hundreds of thousands of dollars into arbitration fees in a desperate attempt to compel action from an arbitrator regarding our unresolved phone issues. Yet, our passionate and unwavering efforts were callously dismissed as “fixed,” when in reality, they were anything but. These ongoing telephone problems and faults continued to affect the viability of my business for a staggering further eleven years, as thoroughly detailed in → Chapter 4 The New Owners Tell Their Story,  Chapter 5 Immoral - Hypocritical Conduct.

 

Following the passing of Helen Handbury, I was deeply touched to receive a handwritten letter from Geoffrey Handbury, her husband. In his heartfelt note, he expressed genuine regret for his inability to engage with the complex issues we discussed, attributing it to his advancing age. I accepted Mr. Handbury's sentiments with grace, recognising the sincerity behind his words and appreciating the connection we had formed. The Handbury family is well-respected in South West Victoria, not only for their generous philanthropy in supporting various worthy causes but also for the authentic warmth and kindness they extend to everyone they meet. Tragically, Geof has since passed away as well, leaving behind a legacy of compassion.

 

I have always felt that Helen Handbury visited my humble abode because, like most people in South West Victoria, she recognised my Tenacity in the face of adversity with Telstra. This determination likely resonated with her after she encountered an article in the Sun Herald, owned by her brother Rupert, about the Melbourne Children’s Hospital, where her mother, Dame Elizabeth Murdoch, served on the board. The statements regarding the Cape Bridgewater Holiday Camp hit home for Helen, inspiring her even further after reading the following article in the Sun Herald in August 1993:  

 

Children's lives could be at risk

Comments made from the Herald Sun newspaper dated 30 August 1993, confirm just how damaging some of these newspaper articles were to my already ailing business, with statements like:

“The Royal Children’s Hospital has told a holiday camp operators in Portland that it cannot send chronically ill children there because of Telecom’s poor phone service. The hospital has banned trips after fears that the children’s lives could be at risk in a medical emergency if the telephone service to the Portland camp continued to malfunction”.

The centre’s stand follows letters from schools, community groups, companies and individuals who have complained about the phone service at Portland’s Cape Bridgewater Holiday camp.”

Youths from the Royal Children’s Centre for Adolescent Health, who were suffering from “chronic illnesses”, visited the camp earlier this year.   

Group leader Ms Louise Rolls said in a letter to the camp the faulty phones had endangered lives and the hospital would not return to the camp unless the phone service could be guaranteed” Arbitrator File No/90

The Murdoch Children's Research Institute (MCRI) stands as Australia’s largest and a distinguished global beacon for pediatric research. With an unwavering commitment to transforming the health of children and adolescents, it tirelessly pursues groundbreaking discoveries and develops innovative treatments that hold the promise of a brighter future. Co-founded in 1986 by the visionary Dame Elisabeth Murdoch and the esteemed Professor David Danks, the institute embodies a legacy rich in hope, dedicated to improving child health through cutting-edge research and compassionate care.

 

A poignant connection exists between the Children's Hospital and a distressing incident where a child almost lost their life due to communication issues at my holiday camp. This critical situation, likely a topic of concern for Helen, would have prompted discussions with her mother, Dame Elisabeth Murdoch. The Hanbury family, known for their generosity, had previously made a significant financial contribution to build a new Portland Life Saving Club on the stunning coastline of Cape Bridgewater Bay. Such challenges underscore not only the embarrassment and degradation faced by me and other small business owners but also highlight a broader issue: the period when Telstra concealed the serious deficiencies in their country telephone network from the government, compromising the safety of our community. 

As I approach my 82nd year, I find it necessary to unveil the shadowy dealings surrounding the Telstra arbitration issues. My experiences reveal a web of treachery involving unscrupulous lawyers, at least one compromised arbitrator, and their conniving forensic accountants who have preyed upon the vulnerabilities of the COT arbitrations for their own nefarious gain. The complicity of the six senators mentioned below serves as a stark reminder of the depths of betrayal that have marred this process.

This entire experience serves as a poignant reminder of the inner strength required to confront daunting obstacles and the relentless resilience needed to pursue justice, even in the face of overwhelming uncertainty and adversity. Through my writing, I hope to illuminate the complexities of our struggle and inspire others to stand firm against injustice.

Regrettably, the Australian government permitted the Swedish telecommunications powerhouse, Ericsson, to penetrate the Australian Government-endorsed COT arbitrations. This disturbing involvement seems to be a deliberate effort to obscure the alarming truth about the numerous critical deficiencies in the Ericsson telephone exchange equipment, which was under investigation during these proceedings. As we delve deeper into this complex issue regarding Ericsson, we will uncover more unsettling details that highlight the extent of the cover-up (Refer to Chapter 5 - US Department of Justice vs Ericsson of Sweden).

In stark contrast, one notable international player took a stand against the injustices faced by the COT cases: the Canadian government. Their acknowledgement of the situation underscores the significance of these issues on a global scale and highlights the need for accountability in the telecommunications sector.

This is the compelling story of a diverse group of ordinary small business owners who unexpectedly found themselves in a fierce David-and-Goliath struggle against one of the largest telecommunications corporations in the country. This corporation not only wields significant economic power but also has troubling ties to various telecommunications companies that are connected to international terrorism. The small business owners, driven by a sense of justice and the desire to protect their livelihoods and communities, banded together to confront this formidable opponent. Their journey highlights the challenges they faced, the resilience they demonstrated, and the critical importance of standing up against powerful entities that threaten their way of life.

One of the original members of our group, Ann Garms OAM, who collaborated closely with me to create a poignant YouTube video detailing her harrowing experience with Telstra Corporation and the intricacies of Australia’s arbitration system, tragically passed away shortly after the video was completed. In a heart-wrenching phone call, she expressed her emotional turmoil, revealing that our relentless battle for justice had taken a significant toll on her life. Just days before, she had taken the courageous step of writing to The Hon Malcolm Turnbull MP, Prime Minister, Parliament House, Canberra and the Hon Mathias Cormann, Minister for Finance, Parliament, to share the deep personal impact our fight had on her.

On 1 June 2021, Mathias Cormann officially assumed office as the Secretary-General of the OECD in Paris, France. Similar to Australia's former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, he possesses comprehensive knowledge about the legitimacy of the COT Cases' claims.  

Don't forget to hover your mouse/cursor over the kangaroo image to the right of this page → → →

It is essential to highlight the importance of the four letters dated August 17, 2017, October 6, 2017, October 9, 2017, and October 10, 2017, written by COT Case Ann Garms OAM shortly before her passing. She expressed her profound disgust at the sexual abuse of children occurring in Parliament House, Canberra. This disturbing activity, involving Senator Bob Collins—who was responsible for our Telstra issues—had a significant negative impact on the supply of documents during our arbitration period, as they were routed from Senator Collins' government office to the COT Cases businesses.

The lives of young children were shattered in an unimaginably horrific manner when these crimes were committed against them, leaving scars that extended into their adult lives. This insidious trauma became painfully apparent to me during my fourteen years as the proprietor of a holiday camp at the picturesque Cape Bridgewater. The sound of waves crashing against the shore was often interspersed with whispers of heartache, as I listened in on various counselling sessions. These experiences deepened my understanding of the vital importance of sponsoring these holiday retreats, which offered a brief respite from their troubled pasts

It is vital to underscore the significance of four letters, dated August 17, 2017, October 6, 2017, October 9, 2017, and October 10, 2017, authored by COT Case Ann Garms OAM shortly before her untimely passing. In these poignant letters, she articulately expressed her profound outrage at the abhorrent sexual abuse of children that was occurring within the walls of Parliament House, Canberra. This grave misconduct, which involved Senator Bob Collins—who bore responsibility for our ongoing issues with Telstra—had a dramatic and detrimental impact on the flow of crucial documents during our arbitration period, as they were improperly routed from Senator Collins' government office directly to the businesses involved with the COT Cases.

The devastating effects of these crimes were particularly harrowing, as they irreparably shattered the lives of innocent children, leaving them with deep emotional scars that would extend far into their adult lives. This insidious trauma became strikingly clear to me during my fourteen years as the proprietor of a holiday camp at the idyllic Cape Bridgewater. The soothing sounds of waves crashing against the shore were often juxtaposed with the whispers of heartache that permeated the air, as I listened in on various counselling sessions, each revealing the depth of pain and suffering endured by the participants. These experiences profoundly deepened my appreciation for the essential role these holiday retreats played, offering a much-needed sanctuary and a brief escape from their troubled pasts.

One memory that stands out vividly is of Sister Maureen Burke, IBVM, the Principal of Loreto College in Ballarat. She played an instrumental role in organising and managing two of these camps between 1992 and 1994, offering guidance and support to those in need. 

Another remarkable person of similar values to Sister Maureen Burke. IBVM was a rough and no-nonsense social worker, Les Twentyman, a prominent figure known for his unwavering dedication to the challenging populations in Melbourne’s tough western suburbs. His personal journey was marked by sacrifice, having suffered a knife wound while passionately advocating for those who had experienced profound hardship. Sadly, two years ago, we lost this compassionate beacon of hope in the western suburbs—a figure who, much like Jesus Christ, devoted his life to listening to and caring for the marginalised. His absence is still acutely felt today, creating a void in the community that is difficult to fill.

Some years later, I sent Sister Aureen Burke, IBVM, an early draft of my manuscript, Absent Justice My Story, concerning my valiant attempt to run a telephone-dependent business without a dependable phone service. Sister Burke wrote back,

“Only I know from personal experience that your story is true, otherwise I would find it difficult to believe. I was amazed and impressed with the thorough, detailed work you have done in your efforts to find justice”  File 231-A → AS-CAV Exhibit 181 to 233

 

Twelve months later, in March of 1993, Sister Karen Donnellon, also from Loreto College, tried to make contact via the Portland Ericsson telephone exchange to arrange an annual camp.   Sister Donnellon later wrote:

“During a one week period in March of this year I attempted to contact Mr Alan Smith at Bridgewater Camp.  In that time I tried many times to phone through.

Each time I dialled I was met with a line that was blank.  Even after several re-dials there was no response.  I then began to vary the times of calling but it made no difference.” File 231-B → AS-CAV Exhibit 181 to 233

Sister Maureen Burke and Sister Karen Donnellon dedicated themselves to the challenging task of securing a dependable telephone connection for the holiday camp.  Their motivation extended beyond the goal of providing me valuable assistance as an affordable retreat for low-income families; it was also fueled by their deep empathy for the struggles of my business, which was hanging on by a thread. The dire circumstances were underscored by the frustrating responses from Telstra's automated voice messages, which routinely informed potential customers that my business had ceased to exist. Many callers were met not with guidance but with an eerie silence, signalling that the number they dialled was likely disconnected and leading to a growing sense of futility.

After the Melbourne Children's Hospital recorded a near-death experience involving me rushing a sick child with cancer to the Portland Hospital, which is 18 kilometres away from my holiday camp, the new owners of my business faced declining sales. This decline continued until at least 2006, thirteen years after the tragic event at the Children's Hospital, as the following two links show: → Chapter 4 The New Owners Tell Their Story,  Chapter 5 Immoral - Hypocritical Conduct.

These persistent communication failures played a crucial role in the unravelling of my business, which found it nearly impossible to compete in a market that increasingly relied on seamless connectivity. The ramifications of this situation also affected the new owners of the holiday camp, who took over in December 2001, seven arduous years after my attempts at arbitration had failed to resolve the ongoing issues. When the time came to sell the property, I had to part with it for a little more than its land value, as I could no longer position it as a viable and thriving venture. The vision I once held for a flourishing holiday destination faded away, eclipsed by the relentless obstacles that stifled both its potential and my aspirations for future success. 

 

Telstra's unsettling admission that they intercepted my telephone conversations raises profound questions—questions further complicated by the local technician's dubious decision to pass that information to a figure named Micky. It leaves me wondering if my lines were being monitored for pedophilic grooming or my questions raised with Australia's former minister of the Army, Malcolm Fraser on 18 September 1967, regarding the continuation of selling wheat to Communist China even though it had been proven by the crew of the British Ship Hoppeak to which I had sailed on that same wheat was being redeployed to the North Vietnamse who were fighting Australian, New Zealand and USA troops in the jungls of North Vietnam. Mr Fraser later became Australia's 22nd Prime Minister from 1975 to 1983

 

Even more alarming is that the Australian Federal Police demanded answers during my 1994 arbitration regarding the interception of phone calls and the transmissions of my arbitration-related faxes, as well as asking Telstra as to why they had they been able to document on an internal memo I had spoken to Malcolm Fraser leading up to and during my arbitration and then redacted that discussion on requested FOI documents. I had talked to Mr Fraser during my arbitration about my previous letter to him and the government on 18 September 1967, about this sale of wheat to Communist China at the time our troops and those of our allies were being slaughtered in North Vietnam after the possibility the Vietcong had eaten a bowl of Australian wheat. My words used were feeding the enemy → Flash Backs – China-Vietnam.

 

What is deeply unsettling is the apparent and insidious collusion among the arbitrator, the process administrator, and Telstra, the defendants in this matter. This alliance raises grave questions, particularly given that all parties involved were acutely aware of the Australian Federal Police's investigation into Telstra during my arbitration in 1994. The blatant disregard for transparency suggests a calculated orchestration in which Telstra somehow possessed alarming insights into the most intimate aspects of my personal and professional life. The Australian Federal Police were compelled to confront Telstra regarding the illicit interception of my phone calls and the dubious transmission of faxes linked to my case. Most disturbingly, they scrutinised an internal memo that chillingly chronicled my conversations with former Prime Minister of Australia Malcolm Fraser just before and during my arbitration, only to find that this critical information had been conveniently redacted from the Freedom of Information documents I sought.

 

In my discussions with Mr. Fraser, I laid out my profound concerns regarding a letter I sent him and the government on September 18, 1967. This letter elaborated on the treacherous sale of Australian wheat to China at a time when our troops were enduring the horrors of conflict in North Vietnam. I expressed my alarming conviction that we were, in effect, “feeding the enemy.” It was common knowledge that this grain was intended for North Vietnam, bolstering the very war machines responsible for the maiming and death of our soldiers fighting bravely against their adversaries. (Refer to Chapter 7-Vietnam Vietcong).

 

Now, I am reigniting this critical and sinister issue on the absentjustice.com homepage, spurred by a particularly unsettling article by Shane Dowling from Kangaroo Court https://shorturl.at/2rREs. In this disquieting piece, he dangerously argues that supplying fighter jet parts to Israel cannot be considered aiding their military endeavours. This rationale mirrors the duplicitous and callous actions of the Liberal Coalition Country Party, which knowingly provided Australian wheat to Communist China, fully understanding that this grain would serve to empower the North Vietnamese forces systematically dismantling our military presence and leading to untold bloodshed among our troops.

 

I am now confronted with a chilling question: Is the clandestine sharing of my private telephone conversations and fax transmissions with an individual named Micky intricately linked to a heinous child molestation ring I adamantly oppose? Or does it tie into the dark dealings that implicate Australia in the tragic destruction of our youth and that of our allies in North Vietnam? The web of treachery runs shockingly deep, endangering the safety of our soldiers and corroding the very foundation of our society.

Micky's involvement was not peripheral. It was central, corrosive, and meticulously engineered to distort legal proceedings and neutralise accountability. Forged documents were legitimised, legal records were doctored, and sworn testimony was used to prop up fiction over fact. And those who were meant to uphold justice not only looked away—they actively participated.

Exhibits 646 and 647 (refer to AS-CAV Exhibits 589 to 647) unveil a chilling truth. On 14 April 1994, Telstra covertly admitted to the Australian Federal Police that my most private and business telephone conversations were not just monitored but meticulously recorded for several months. Disturbingly, this invasive surveillance occurred only when a specific officer was on duty—the very same individual who once operated as a Telstra technician in Portland.

This technician, it seems, acted as a puppet master, feeding this unknown figure named 'Micky' with my phone and fax numbers, thus opening a gateway for unscrupulous intrusions into my life (see Exhibit 518 FOI folio document K03273 -AS-CAV Exhibits 495 to 541). The betrayal runs deep, shrouded in secrecy and complicity.

Ann Gams OAM and I were wise to enlist the AFP in our fight against these shadowy forces. Yet, what has haunted me for the past thirty years is the treachery displayed by the arbitrator, Dr. Gordon Hughes. He shamelessly refused to permit his financial consultants to evaluate the losses that the AFP claimed could not be disclosed while they conducted their "investigations." → Australian Federal Police Investigation File No/1

 

To shed light on the insidious nature of the events that transpired, it's crucial for the reader to grasp the twisted timelines surrounding my experiences and the dubious fax screening practices employed by Telstra as they funneled communications to Dr. Hughes's Melbourne office (refer to the Scandrett & Associates report Open Letter File No/12 and File No/13). The diversion of these crucial faxes to his Sydney office raises alarming questions, particularly considering that several of these documents were never returned to Dr. Hughes's office. This pattern of interference suggests a deliberate obstruction, casting a long shadow over the integrity of the entire process.

 

I must take the reader forward fourteen years to the following letter dated 30 July 2009. According to this letter dated 30 July 2009, from Graham Schorer (COT spokesperson) and ex-client of the arbitrator Dr Hughes (see Chapter 3 - Conflict of Interest) wrote to Paul Crowley, CEO Institute of Arbitrators Mediators Australia (IAMA), attaching a statutory declaration (see" Burying The Evidence File 13-H and a copy of a previous letter dated 4 August 1998 from Mr Schorer to me, detailing a phone conversation Mr Schorer had with the arbitrator (during the arbitrations in 1994) regarding lost Telstra COT related faxes. During that conversation, the arbitrator explained, in some detail, that:

"Hunt & Hunt (The company's) Australian Head Office was located in Sydney, and (the company) is a member of an international association of law firms. Due to overseas time zone differences, at close of business,  Melbourne's incoming facsimiles are night switched to automatically divert to Hunt & Hunt Sydney office where someone is always on duty. There are occasions on the opening of the Melbourne office, the person responsible for cancelling the night switching of incoming faxes from the Melbourne office to the Sydney Office, has failed to cancel the automatic diversion of incoming facsimiles." Burying The Evidence File 13-H.

Dr. Hughes’s failure to disclose the faxing issues to the Australian Federal Police during my arbitration is deeply concerning. The AFP was investigating the interception of my faxes to the arbitrator's office. Yet, this crucial matter was a significant aspect of my claim that Dr. Hughes chose not to address in his award or mention in any of his findings. The loss of essential arbitration documents throughout the COT Cases is a serious indictment of the process.

It is also essential that the reader understand that Dr Hughes has never written back to the COT case apologising that we COT were not told what his Sydney office was investigating on behalf of several Telstra employees even though it should have been paramount when it became known amongst the COT Cases some of these Sydney Telstra employees were under investigation for stealing millions upon millions of dollars from the public as well as some within Telstra being assosated with pedophile activities.

Despite being informed that a staggering 47 per cent of my business revenue stemmed from social clubs and single clubs, Dr. Hughes purposely excluded that percentage from my total financial losses. This blatant disregard for the truth embodies the very corruption that has caused so much suffering.

On page seven of its final, 3 May 1995, financial-evaluation report, which both Telstra and I received, FHCA states:

“An analysis of the clientele of CBHC  shows that only 53% were in fact schools.” (See Open Letter File No 57-A to 57-D)

There is an enormous difference between $30.82 for a two-night stay for school groups and $120.00 to $165.00 for a two-night stay for social club patrons. Knowingly downgrading my losses by a large percentage is verging on fraudulent, criminal conduct.

The potential Over Forties Single Club patrons’ testimonials are also referred to in the AUSTEL report of 3 March 1994:

“As Mr Smith points out, the RVA message had the potential to severely damage his business. An important point in relation to the possible financial impact of the RVA message on the Cape Bridgewater Holiday Camp service is the camp’s dependence on group bookings. In June 1992 the camp tariffs ranged from $1500 to $6000 per week, so the loss of even one booking because of the RVA problem could mean a substantial financial loss.” (See p33, point 85, Open Letter File No/6)

 

 

I also demonstrated to the government communications regulator, AUSTEL (now called ACMA), when their representatives visited my venue, that most of my singles club customers regularly bought souvenirs before they left: printed Cape Bridgewater t-shirts, sweatshirts, postcards, headscarves, and crafted driftwood plant arrangements. Schoolchildren didn’t have that sort of money and typically only bought postcards. FHCA ignored all the income I lost from lost singles club bookings, i.e., the profit I made on the souvenirs, as well as the $120 to $165 tariff per person for these customers.

The representatives emphasised once again that, regardless of the information provided to the arbitrator, he could not decide on my losses until Telstra proved that my ongoing telephone problems had been resolved. They reminded me that in my initial settlement with Telstra on December 11, 1992, despite receiving an award, my phone issues persisted. This is why we were now in arbitration eighteen months later. AUSTEL did not intend to make the same mistake again.

The Arbitration Project Manager, John Rundell’s statement to my arbitration forensic accountant Derek Ryan Open letter File No/45-E) that: “FHCA had excluded a large amount of information from their final report at the request of the arbitrator” ties in with the excluded single club material, and my Echo tourism venture losses, which I provided, under confidentiality, to FHCA in February 1995 which the Superintendent Detective Sargeant of the Australain Fedral Police had told me to ensure they just not under any circumstances proved to Telstra before the AFP had concluded their investigations, when FHCA visited my business in Februay 1995, was not adhered to by FHCA. The strange look I had from Sue Hodgkinson about the possibility that pedophilic grooming and or the mischievous electronic monitoring of my social club patrons had been raised during my arbitration with all parties after AUSTEL, provided the Commissioner of the AFP with the following letter, which states:

“Yesterday we were called upon by officers of the Australian Federal Police in relation to the taping of the telephone services of COT Cases.

“Given the investigation now being conducted by that agency and the responsibilities imposed on AUSTEL by section 47 of the Telecommunications Act 1991, the nine tapes previously supplied by Telecom to AUSTEL were made available for the attention of the Commissioner of Police.” (See Illegal Interception File No/3)

On 3 March 1994, this article appeared in the Australian Observer newspaper in the coastal town of Portland, Victoria (AS 773-b), noting:

“Federal Police officers are investigating allegations of possible illegal activity on the part of Telecom Australia.

Officers from the Federal Police visited Portland last week and interviewed Cape Bridgewater Holiday Camp proprietor, Alan Smith, who is one of the four original members of COT (Casualties of Telecom).”

Despite the COT Cases highlighting privacy concerns regarding the arbitration process, with the Australian Federal Police, the Minister for Government Communications, the Hon. Michael Lee MP, who assumed office shortly after his predecessor, the Hon. Bob Collins (who was involved in serious allegations of child abuse in his office at the Canberra government house), communicated with me during my arbitration concermimg the hacking into my telephone conversations and faxes, as shown in the following two 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)

Exhibits 646 and 647 (see AS-CAV Exhibits 589 to 647) clearly show that Telstra admitted in writing to the Australian Federal Police on 14 April 1994 that my private and business telephone conversations were listened to and recorded over several months, but only when a particular officer was on duty. 

I again emphasise this particular Telstra officer was also the same individual who supplied the still unnamed 'Micky' with the phone and fax numbers of my business associates. (Refer to Exhibit 518 FOI folio document K03273 - AS-CAV Exhibits 495 to 541).

Our phone and fax interception issues were headline news over many months in our local newspapers and all the major national newspapers. On 15 April 1994, ex-prime minister of Australia, Malcolm Fraser, discussed my phone interception issues in the Sun-Herald newspaper and how FOI documents discuss his and my telephone conversations being transcribed onto Telstra file notes. The Herald Sun, the newspaper, reported:

“FORMER prime minister Malcolm Fraser yesterday demanded Telecom explain why his name appears in a restricted internal memo.

“Mr Fraser’s request follows the release of a damning government report this week which criticised Telecom for recording conversations without customer permission.

“Mr Fraser said Mr Alan Smith, of the Cape Bridgewater Holiday Camp near Portland, phoned him early last year seeking advice on a long-running dispute with Telecom which Mr Fraser could not help.” (See Our Saga File No 2)

Who within Telstra Corporation felt it was necessary to record the fact that I had placed a call to former Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser? I am particularly concerned about whether my conversation is included among the nine audio tapes that AUSTEL provided to the Australian Federal Police but were subsequently withheld from the COT cases. It is essential to clarify that throughout this process, I was never a suspect in any criminal activity, nor was I regarded as a potential threat to Australia’s national security. This is further underscored in my letter dated September 18, 1967, which I also forwarded to the Commonwealth Police (now known as the Australian Federal Police). My intent in documenting these details is to ensure transparency and accountability regarding the handling of communications and the implications of such recordings. (Refer to Chapter 7-Vietnam Vietcong).

Read about the dealings with Ericsson on 19 December 2019, as reported in the Australian media, because it is firmly intertwined in the corrupt practices of both Telstra, Ericsson and those who administered the COT arbitrations between 1994 and 1998. This media release states:

"One of Telstra's key partners in the building out of their 5G network in Australia is set to fork out over $1.4 billion after the US Department of Justice accused them of bribery and corruption on a massive scale and over a long period of time.

Sweden's telecoms giant Ericsson has agreed to pay more than $1.4 billion following an extensive investigation which saw the Telstra-linked Company 'admitting to a years-long campaign of corruption in five countries to solidify its grip on telecommunications business." (https://www.channelnews.com.au/key-telstra-5g-partner-admits-to-bribery-corruption/)

The U.S. Department of Justice has unearthed a chilling and sinister truth about Ericsson's telecommunications operations and their insidious ties to international terrorism. The COT Cases expose a disturbing web of corruption, raising urgent questions about why Ericsson was permitted to act with impunity, acquiring the key technical witness in the arbitration proceedings that examined their dubious claims against the very telephone equipment under critical scrutiny. It is baffling—and deeply troubling—that the Australian government has remained eerily silent about the horrifying mistreatment of the COT Cases, especially when Ericsson seemed to orchestrate the manipulation of Lane Telecommunications Pty Ltd for their own nefarious purposes.

I urgently implore the Australian government to reveal the dark machinations that allowed Ericsson to purchase Lane Telecommunications during a delicate, government-sanctioned arbitration process. This took place amid serious allegations that Telstra and Ericsson were knowingly exploiting discredited Ericsson AXE exchange equipment—flawed technology that many nations have hastily discarded due to its severe deficiencies (see File 10-B Evidence File No/10-A to 10-f).

The evidence paints a damning picture: the arbitrator and their advisors crafted a treacherous landscape of deceit and betrayal, resulting in a grotesque miscarriage of justice for the COT Cases. Their actions were not simply unethical; they represented a calculated betrayal of the trust placed in them, steeped in scandal and lawlessness. This sinister manipulation of justice reveals a shocking disregard for accountability, leaving victims in a labyrinth of treachery where the true architects of this corruption evade scrutiny.

It is glaringly apparent from the provided Google link that the COT Cases were not just justified but compelled to demand answers about the alarming situation in which Ericsson was allowed to purchase the main technical witness involved in the arbitration concerning their claims against Ericsson's telephone equipment. This crux of the investigation was central to the COT arbitrations (refer to Chapter 5 - US Department of Justice vs Ericsson of Sweden), yet it reeks of corruption.

.

The following letter, dated 16 July 1997, was written by John Pinnock, who was Australia's second appointed Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman (TIO) as well as the official administrator of the COT arbitrations, to William Hunt and the lawyer to Graham Schorer (COT spokesperson).  In this letter, Mr Pinnock notes that.

“Lane is presently involved in arbitrations between Telstra and Bova, Dawson, Plowman and Schorer. The change of ownership of Lane is of concern in relation to Lane’s ongoing role in these arbitrations.

“The first area of concern is that some of the equipment under examination in the arbitrations is provided by Ericsson.…

“The second area of concern is that Ericsson has a pecuniary interest in Telstra. Ericsson makes a large percentage of its equipment sales to Telstra which is one of its major clients.

“It is my view that Ericsson’s ownership of Lane puts Lane in a position of potential conflict of interest should it continue to act as Technical Advisor to the Resource Unit. …

“The effect of a potential conflict of interest is that Lane should cease to act as the Technical Advisor with effect from a date shall be determined.” (See File 296-A - GS-CAV Exhibit 258 to 323)

In fact, John Pinnock wrote to the other remaining four COT cases making five in all, for whom the arbitrator had not yet handed down his findings, to warn them that this breach of ethics and promise by the previous TIO Warwick Smith had not been kept i.e.; the TIO had allowed Lane to be the principal technical consultant to their claims and not the promised DMR brought in from Canada. 

None of the other COT Cases that the arbitrator handed down his findings on before it was exposed, Lane had been purchased during the COT arbitrations, even though they had been contracted to do all of the COT arbitration processes.  Why were the previous COT arbitrations, where the arbitrator had not been aware that Ericsson and Lane had to have been in negotiations during the arbitrations he had completed, unaware of the massive conflict of interest, granted the same leave to appeal their previous arbitration awards, which the remaining five COT Cass arbitrators were not being granted? The purchasing of the Australian government-appointed technical unit Lane had to have been in motion months before the purchase. The government should investigate each COT Case to determine the losses incurred due to Lane's failure to address the ongoing Ericsson AXE telephone problems, which destroyed the COT Case businesses after the conclusion of their arbitrations. 

The trauma continues

Why was this official advice not acted upon for the good of all the COT Cases? 

On 26 September 1997, Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman John Pinnock (the second-appointed administrator to the COT arbitrations formally addressed a Senate estimates committee, stating:

“In the process leading up to the development of the arbitration procedures – the claimants were told clearly that documents were to be made available to them under the FOI Act.

“Firstly, and perhaps most significantly, the arbitrator had no control over that process, because it was a process conducted entirely outside the ambit of the arbitration procedures.”

Discrimination

Moreover, dark and unsettling is the Senate Evidence File No 12 two letters to me from the Senate threatening to hold me in contempt of the Senate, which reveals the sinister reality I've faced—direct threats on two separate occasions, first on August 16, 2001, and again on December 6, 2004. In those chilling moments, I was explicitly warned that if I dared to disclose the In-Camera Hansard records from July 6 and July 9, 1998, I would face severe charges of contempt against the Senate. This ominous warning is particularly infuriating, as those records hold critical information that could empower the sixteen citizens who have been unjustly denied legal recourse to finally seek justice.

In a dramatic Senate committee meeting, a confrontation erupted when National Party Senator Ron Boswell unleashed a blistering critique aimed at a senior officer involved in the Telstra arbitration process. With palpable anger, he exclaimed, "You’re really a disgrace; the whole lot of you," his voice cutting through the tension like a knife. This outburst sent shockwaves through the chamber, drawing the immediate attention of the committee chair. Yet, under scrutiny, Senator Boswell was forced to retract his words, stating, "Madam, I withdraw that remark." This moment, though seemingly one of accountability, merely masked the deeply entrenched corruption and lack of integrity surrounding Telstra's dealings with the COT Cases.

"Madam, I withdraw that, but I do say this: there is a unity ticket going right through this parliament. This has united every person in this parliament—something no one else has ever managed to do—and Telstra has orchestrated it all magnificently. They have managed to unite the Labor Party, the National Party, the Liberal Party, the Democrats, and the Greens—all standing together in a singular and profound distrust of Telstra. You have woven a web of deception that few could have imagined."

Labour Party Senator Chris Schacht further emphasised the corruption when he warned the same Telstra arbitration officer that if they only compensated the five 'litmus test' COT cases while neglecting the other lingering sixteen COT cases, it "would be an injustice to those remaining 16". Yet, the John Howard National Liberal Party (NLP) government sanctioned these punitive damages in only five select litmus cases, simultaneously releasing over 150,000 Freedom of Information documents that had been ruthlessly concealed during the government-endorsed arbitration from 1994 to 1998. 

documents.

In the case of the COT Cases during their arbitration processes, the strategic withholding of crucial information proved devastating. Aware of the implications, I urged the COT Cases to request access to their local telephone exchange logbook formally. But the sinister forces at play rendered this request futile. This logbook held damning evidence against Telstra, documenting every fault complaint from hapless customers. Yet, I found it suspiciously absent—conveniently hidden from me, the arbitrator, and even the Commonwealth Ombudsman (refer to File 114 - AS-CAV Exhibit 92 to 127). Why? What were they afraid of revealing? The shadows of deceit loomed large, suggesting that Telstra was determined to shield its incompetence from prying eyes.

The logbook for the Portland/Cape Bridgewater telephone exchange is not just a crucial document; it is a testament to the betrayal that AUSTEL and Telstra inflicted upon the COT Cases. In a duplicitous gesture, they assured us that this logbook would be made available before the arbitration agreement was signed on April 21, 1994. Had they honoured this promise, it might have shed light on the myriad telephone problems that continued to plague my business, altering the arbitrator’s perception of our plight significantly. The betrayal we suffered culminated in an irrevocable decision that devastated the lives of the COT Cases.

absentjustice.com is not a work of fiction. It is a chronicle of events supported by over 1,200 documented exhibits attached to this website, each one a fragment of a profoundly unsettling truth. What follows is the story of a relentless pursuit for justice, repeatedly undermined by a network of individuals entrusted with the law. Government bureaucrats, elite law firms, sworn arbitrators, and public institutions—bound by duty to uphold integrity—were instead entangled in acts of bribery, extortion, robbery, judicial tampering, and Gaslighting.

Evidence was manipulated after its submission. Legal documents were deliberately altered. Testimonies were given in support of records known to be forged. Falsehoods, fraud, and manufactured misinformation were not just used—they were institutionalised.

This story is not merely an exposé. It is a reckoning. And every exhibit speaks for itself.

Unveil a disturbing and intricate pattern of corruption that developed before, during, and after the COT arbitrations. They document how government representatives became deeply entangled in a morally questionable framework that betrayed their public duty. In the shadows, powerful officials formed a clandestine alliance, prioritising their own personal interests and agendas over the well-being of the very citizens they were sworn to serve independently.

This breach of trust not only undermined the citizens’ faith in their government but also severely compromised the transparency and integrity of the investigation into the arbitration claims against Telstra. As a result, the process became tainted, leaving COT claimants marginalised and unheard. The telecommunications infrastructure that Telstra relied upon in these dealings was shrouded in controversy, further raising concerns about accountability and ethical conduct among those in positions of power. The ramifications of this corrupt alliance extend far beyond the immediate arbitration claims, impacting the broader landscape of public trust in government institutions and regulatory agencies.

One particularly shocking incident underscores the depths of this corruption: crucial evidence, which could have illuminated the secret dealings of a government-owned corporation, was willfully and systematically destroyed. This reckless act raises profound concerns about the accountability and transparency that should underpin public governance. Furthermore, during the review of the highly contentious COT Cases, vital information was purposefully redacted from official records, creating a deceptive façade of compliance while obstructing the pursuit of truth. This deliberate manipulation of information allowed the corporation to evade the scrutiny it so richly deserved, escaping the severe consequences of its actions.

Those tasked with examining archived documents found themselves ensnared in a tangled web of suppressed disclosures, navigating a labyrinth specifically designed to thwart the pursuit of justice. This oppressive environment effectively subverts the foundational principles of fairness and public trust, leaving citizens to grapple with a system that betrays their essential rights. The repercussions of these actions extend far beyond mere bureaucratic incompetence; they present a significant threat to the very integrity of democratic institutions.

The relentless tide of corruption and manipulation erodes public confidence. It undermines the societal framework, creating a grim atmosphere where accountability and justice are mere illusions, obscured by layers of deceit. The dark undercurrents of this governmental decay call for urgent and decisive action to dismantle the corrupt machinery and restore the fundamental principles of democracy, ensuring that the rights and voices of citizens are no longer silenced in the shadows of greed and malfeasance.

Among the most alarming violations was the clandestine interception of telephone calls and the unauthorised hacking of fax transmissions by Telstra—a trusted national provider. These breaches of privacy were not just invasive; they were weaponised. Sensitive communications were siphoned off and delivered into the hands of an individual known only as Micky—a figure whose activities have caused significant unease within the ranks of the Australian Federal Police → Australian Federal Police Investigation File

Micky's involvement was not peripheral. It was central, corrosive, and meticulously engineered to distort legal proceedings and neutralise accountability. Forged documents were legitimised, legal records were doctored, and sworn testimony was used to prop up fiction over fact. And those who were meant to uphold justice not only looked away—they actively participated.

Exhibits 646 and 647 (refer to AS-CAV Exhibits 589 to 647) unveil a chilling truth. On 14 April 1994, Telstra covertly admitted to the Australian Federal Police that my most private and business telephone conversations were not just monitored but meticulously recorded for several months. Disturbingly, this invasive surveillance occurred only when a specific officer was on duty—the very same individual who once operated as a Telstra technician in Portland.

This technician, it seems, acted as a puppet master, feeding this unknown figure named 'Micky' with my phone and fax numbers, thus opening a gateway for unscrupulous intrusions into my life (see Exhibit 518 FOI folio document K03273 -AS-CAV Exhibits 495 to 541). The betrayal runs deep, shrouded in secrecy and complicity.

The fax imprint across the top of this letter dated 12 May 1995 (Open Letter File No 55-A) is the same as the fax imprint described in the 7 January 1999 Scandrett & Associates report provided to Senator Ron Boswell (see Open Letter File No/12 and File No/13), confirming faxes were intercepted during the COT arbitrations. One of the two technical consultants attesting to the validity of this January 1999 fax interception report emailed me on 17 December 2014, stating:

“I still stand by my statutory declaration that I was able to identify that the incoming faxes provided to me for review had at some stage been received by a secondary fax machine and then retransmitted, this was done by identifying the dual time stamps on the faxes provided.” (Front Page Part One File No/14) 

This is not merely a catalogue of criminal behaviour. It is a reckoning with a system that allowed deception to flourish under the guise of law. And every exhibit tells a story the institutions hoped would remain buried.

(see Bad Bureaucrats File No/11 – Part One and File No/11 – Part Two)

Copper Wire was not compatible

As unveiled in "Chapter 1 - Can We Fix The CAN," the government communications regulator AUSTEL, which has since rebranded as ACMA, became aware of the shocking plight of these 120,000 small businesses and countless residential Telstra customers suffering from relentless phone service issues. Rather than coming forward and exposing the full extent of this scandal, AUSTEL chose to downplay the crisis, issuing a publicly released COT Cases report that manipulated the truth, claiming there were only about 50 Type COT problems plaguing the nation. This falsehood was not merely misguided—it was a calculated effort to silence the voices of those wronged.

This deceitful narrative extended beyond public reports; it infiltrated the very halls of justice. The misleading figures were carefully withheld from judges, arbitrators, and mediators tasked with evaluating the COT cases, transforming a quest for justice into a farcical charade. As a result, many vulnerable Australians, motivated by desperation and hope, were driven to squander thousands of dollars—often through borrowed funds—on futile legal battles against Telstra. They fought against an entity that was morally and legally obligated to provide basic telecommunications services, only to find themselves caught in a labyrinth of corruption and betrayal. This story serves as a chilling reminder of the lengths powerful corporations will go to protect their interests at the expense of ordinary citizens, illuminating the sinister reality behind their façade of compliance and responsibility.

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.

Blowing the Whistle

In democratic societies, a paradox often emerges: if uncovering harmful actions is perceived as morally ambiguous, why do governments actively incentivise citizens to report crimes and injustices? This intriguing contradiction reveals a deeper reality about civic duty, which forms the foundation of justice and public accountability. At the heart of this dynamic lies the figure of the whistleblower: an individual who bravely opts for truth over silence, integrity over convenience, and justice over blind conformity.

Whistleblowers embody both the honour of standing valiantly for what is right and the heavy burden of facing retaliation, social ostracism, and profound personal risk. Their remarkable courage compels us to confront an ethical crossroads: should we celebrate and support those who expose misconduct, thereby fostering a culture of transparency and accountability? Or do we silence these vital voices to maintain societal stability, potentially risking the erosion of ethical principles that underpin our communities?

Our upcoming twelve-chapter documentary will embark on an in-depth exploration of this compelling question. Each chapter, meticulously curated for both clarity and emotional resonance, will investigate the multifaceted reality of whistleblowing. Through evocative storytelling and rigorously verified insights, we will illustrate how acts of dissent—though often uncomfortable—can shine a light on pathways toward equity and justice.

To enrich the viewer’s experience, each chapter will be complemented by striking visuals that capture the profound tension, humanity, and hope woven into these narratives. These images will act as more than mere embellishments; they will serve as emotional anchors that enhance understanding and provoke thoughtful reflection. With the image editing process projected for completion by mid-September 2025, we are on the verge of delivering a powerful and cohesive narrative that transcends superficial storytelling.

Ultimately, this documentary aspires not only to inform but to provoke a deeper contemplation among audiences: what kind of society do we wish to nurture—one that uplifts and values courageous truth-tellers, or one that fears the disruption their revelations may bring?

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.