This website absentjustice.com is a work in progress, last edited in November 2023. A click on Absent Justice Book 2 is free, If you want to donate an appreciation to the publication, please send it directly to Transparency International 

Imagine this Home page is a puzzle with all of the added clues. Not many crimes can be solved as easily by downloading the advertised exhibits, which are the clues that, when downloaded and compared with similarly displayed exhibits, allow you to determine whether the Casualties of Telstra story is true or false. 

Downloading each of the nominated exhibits (attached to this story refer to Government Evidence Files  allows you to prove the story is true. One clue (downloaded with another and then another), when read in conjunction with each of these combined exhibits, will allow the reader to gradually piece together for themselves that there were multiple crimes committed by Telstra in the 1990s and are still being committed by Telstra in 2023, as the following https://shorturl.at/xPU29 shows.

The Facebook page https://shorturl.at/LOTX0 shows there are many disgruntled people in Australia who, like the Casualties of Telstra, have good reason to complain about Telstra's conduct towards them as customers, a problem that has been happening for years; some complaints are worse than others, as my 1988 to 2023 Casualties of Telstra story shows.  

How do you publish a true account of what has happened during various Australian Government-endorsed Arbitrations without attaching the exhibits to support those facts, as we have been forced to do because the corruption within the government bureaucracy is so rife?  How does the author prove that government public servants fed privileged information to the then Australian Government-owned telecommunications carrier (the defendants) but also concealed the same documentation from the claimants, i.e. their fellow Australian citizens? Chapter 1- Prior to Arbitration

How do you tell a story that is so unbelievable that even the author has doubts to the authenticity of what they are writing until they check their records before continuing with the story being written? How do you expose collusion between an arbitrator, various appointed government watchdogs (umpire) and the defendants? 

Read about the corruption within the government bureaucracy that plagued the COT arbitrations. Learn who committed these horrendous crimes and where they sit in Australia’s Establishment and the legal system that allowed these injustices to occur.

Who would ever have believed (without the proof on this website) that a small group of business owners was forced into arbitration with advice from the government that they would receive all necessary documentation to support their claims, only to find those documents never arrived until three years after their arbitrations concluded. We have no alternative but to include the exhibits the way we have. This is truly an unbelievable story.  

How Telstra and its legal arbitration defence team perverted the course of justice by using such dubious strategies as intercepting relevant arbitration related faxes as the Scandrett & Associates facsimile interception report, Open Letter File No/12 and File No/13 shows.

Failing to deliver crucial FOI documents (or delivering them months and even years too late, often so highly censored that little intelligible remained), even destroying documentary evidence and fabricating evidence.

How central points our claim at arbitration was ignored by the arbitrator and how no amount of effort to have these points addressed bore any fruit.

Together, these travesties spell a break-down of justice, way out of proportion to the problem we began with — people asking that their phone services be guaranteed to work to a reasonable standard so that they can reliably conduct their businesses.

And why did it seem everyone was protecting Telstra, turning a blind eye to what was unlawful behaviour? Withholding important discovery documents in an arbitration procedure is unlawful. Tampering with evidence in the arbitration is unlawful Tampering With Evidence.  Relying on defence documents that are known to be flawed, in arbitration, is unlawful Telstra's Falsified BCI Report.

Phone tapping of conversations without a warrant is unlawful. During the second Australian Federal Police interview with me at my business on 26 September 1994, the Australian Federal Police asked me 93 questions Australian Federal Police Investigation File No/1 as these transcripts show. That advice received from the AFP shows Telstra had indeed intercpted my telecommunication services conversations without being authorised to.

Someone within Telstra must have authorised this unathorised interception of my telephome conversations and faxes. 

For most rural Australian business operators, running a telephone-dependent business was not like it is today. When our story began, most rural businesses were not using the internet, email or mobile phones. Checking emails and mobile phones at the start of each working day on a regular basis was not an option. Mobile phones did not work in most rural locations and mobile black-spots, even in the city outskirts, were common. It was not until the late 1990s that this new technology became a typical way to run a business. 

So, today’s younger generations might find it hard to understand that, only 20 years ago, a corporation like Telstra and its government minders were able to cheat so many Australians into believing it was trying to fix its ailing telecommunications network. 

So, our COT story is not just old historic phone complaints that affected Australia 20-plus years ago: the same people who covered up the devastation that these ongoing problems were causing the Australian consumer still have powerful positions in government and Telstra in 2023.   

I believe you are taking the most appropriate course of action

I have never received a written response from BCI, but 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."   

It is also clear from Exhibit 8, dated 11 August 1995 (see BCI Telstra’s M.D.C Exhibits 1 to 46 a letter from BCI to Telstra's Steve Black and Exhibit 36 (see BCI Telstra’s M.D.C Exhibits 1 to 46 a further letter from BCI to Telstra's John Armstrong that neither letter is on a BCI letterhead, as are Exhibits 1 to 7, from BCI to Telstra (see BCI Telstra’s M.D.C Exhibits 1 to 46. 

Both Exhibits 8 and 36 were provided by Telstra to the Senate Committee [on notice under oath as being authentic] in October 1997 to support that BCI Cape Bridgewater tests were genuine when the evidence on absentjustice.com and Telstra's Falsified BCI Report confirms no such testing ever took place at Portland or Cape Bridgewater (Victoria) as described in the BCI report shows. The Report states that BCI used the updated CCS7 testing equipment to prove the tests were genuine when the nearest telephone exchange that could facilitate that testing equipment was the Warrnambool telephone exchange 1o0 plus kilometres from Portland and Cape Bridgewater. However, Telstra still provided a copy of this inaccurate report to one of their arbitration witnesses, a clinical psychologist before that psychologist interviewed me, believing I was insane and imagining the many proven faults that eventually forced me to sell my holiday camp six years after my arbitration failed to fix the faults as part of that agreed government endorsed process.

Worse, the new owners who purchased my holiday at land value only Chapter 4, The New Owners Tell Their Story, because I could not add a goodwill component to the sale as no one in government, neither Telstra nor the Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman, would admit my arbitration had not fixed my ongoing telephone problems. They believed to have accepted this failure would have meant all of the other COT arbitrations (twelve) would also have to be reinvestigated. So, my complaints were ignored for six years after the completion of my arbitration, and in the end, I was forced to sell my business in December 2001

Of course, the new owners, Darren and Jenny Lewis, inherited the ongoing telephone and faxing problems and, within six years, were declared bankrupt in the Melbourne Magistrates Court Chapter 5 Immoral - hypocritical conduct