Until the late 1990s, the Australian government held complete ownership of the nation’s telecommunications network through Telecom, the primary communications carrier. This state-run entity, which has since been privatised and now operates under the name Telstra, dominated the market with an unwavering monopoly. Regrettably, this lack of competition allowed the network to deteriorate, resulting in inadequate services that frustrated numerous consumers and businesses alike. Among those affected were four small business owners who struggled with severe communication breakdowns that severely impeded their daily operations and growth potential.

Out of desperation, these business owners sought arbitration with Telstra, hoping to resolve their grievances and secure compensation for their losses. However, the arbitration process quickly revealed itself to be a farce. The appointed arbitrator displayed blatant partiality, permitting Telstra to sidestep accountability and diminish the claims made by the affected business owners—collectively known as the Casualties of Telstra (COT) members. Disturbing evidence emerged, showcasing that Telstra had engaged in serious misconduct throughout the arbitration, manipulating the proceedings to their benefit while undermining the integrity of the dispute resolution system.

Despite these revelations, the Australian government and the Australian Federal Police have inexplicably failed to hold Telstra or its alleged co-conspirators accountable for their actions. This persistent lack of oversight prompts critical questions: Why do Telstra and the bureaucrats charged with ensuring fair communication practices continue to deflect from the truth? Why are the legitimate claims of the COT members dismissed as frivolous when their experiences represent anything but?

The complexities surrounding the arbitration issues of the group known as the 'Casualties of Telstra' are profound and multifaceted, with intricate details that warrant a thorough examination. To facilitate understanding, we have meticulously organised these various concerns into clearly defined sections, accessible via the menu bar above. This structured approach enables readers to uncover the pervasive corruption and collusive tactics embedded within the arbitration processes, which have stifled justice.

Despite the official government records indicating that the COT cases were guaranteed support by the government communications regulator AUSTEL (now known as ACMA) and the Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman, who were responsible for overseeing the arbitration process, the reality was quite different for me. I was assured that, if I could manage to cover the exorbitant costs of these arbitrations, which for many participants totalled hundreds of thousands of dollars, and in my case surpassed a staggering $300,000, I would eventually receive the critical documents necessary to substantiate my claims. The arbitrator made it clear that no formal decision could be rendered until all the technical issues related to the phone service, which had prompted the claims, were thoroughly resolved.

The website absentjustice.com highlights a troubling reality: the persistent issues with both phone and fax services remained unresolved during the arbitration process. Despite assurances, I never received the crucial extracts from the telephone exchange logbook, which were supposed to document my complaints alongside those of other Telstra customers in my locality. These logbook entries were more than mere records; they were intended to serve as compelling evidence, illustrating that the telephone faults were pervasive, affecting not just a single user but the entire community. The absence of this vital information significantly hindered the arbitrator's efforts to understand the full extent of the service disruptions and to advocate for a comprehensive resolution to these ongoing telephone faults that were still affecting the viability of my business. Refer to Chapter 4 The New Owners Tell Their Story.

 

 

Newcomers need to recognise that specific exhibits referenced throughout this text, such as Evidence File-1 and Evidence-File-2, are crucial for verification. By clicking on these links, you will open PDF files that contain vital evidence supporting our claims. By following these references and exploring the related documents provided across our multiple pages, you will not only be able to validate our narrative but also gain a more precise and deeper understanding of the significant challenges we face in confronting this issue.

Embark on a revealing journey into the alarming world of egregious crimes by unscrupulous individuals—corrupt politicians and legal professionals manipulating arbitration and mediation systems in Australia. Descriptors like "shameful" and "treacherous" barely capture the severity of their actions. Visitors to this website have recognised the parallels between its content and widespread criminal behaviour, particularly fraud.

 

The COT (Call or Text) cases have endured relentless harassment manifested as bullying and deceptive tactics to undermine their businesses and navigate government-endorsed arbitration. Alarmingly, the entire Telstra board was implicated in significant corporate fraud during the Telstra Casualties arbitrations, exposing profound systemic failings.

 

In this environment of deceit, honest businesses suffer as deception becomes pervasive. The submission of a forged arbitration defense document by Telstra severely obstructed the COT cases from presenting their struggles effectively. The arbitrator's misguided declaration that Telstra had resolved its issues highlights a troubling disconnect from reality. The extensive evidence compiled here contradicts this conclusion and complicates the pursuit of justice.

 

Uncover shocking truths about heinous crimes in the political realm and the unscrupulous individuals exploiting the legal system. Issues of foreign bribery and entrenched corruption, alongside a lack of accountability detailed on Justice.com, have triggered investigations into political corruption. This disturbing environment is not theoretical; it is linked to tangible criminal actions and fraud against the government.

 

This dark tapestry of corruption is woven into government operations, characterised by manipulation, bribery, extortion, and intimidation, even involving the Australian Federal Police. The judicial system has dismissed the legitimate grievances of the COT cases as vexatious, rendering judgments that deny justice and allowing a culture of deception to persist. Visitors to this site have noted the striking parallels with accounts of fraud that reveal systematic failures in governance.

How many Australian businesses have faced the gut-wrenching surprise of aggressive and unexpected takeovers while they were teetering on the edge of vulnerability? How many of these enterprises were blindsided entirely by takeover bids because they were operating under the false assumption that their struggles were invisible to outsiders? How many were caught off guard, their sensitive information exploited due to unauthorised access to private telephone conversations?

In reflecting on my own experience, I am left to wonder how easily my business can be targeted right under the Government's nose. Across Australia, countless legal battles unfold—some open-and-shut cases brimming with compelling evidence—yet many are lost at the critical moment due to the opposition’s shocking discovery of sensitive information, often seemingly pulled from thin air. How much private and confidential data, which everyday Australians and businesses entrust to the Telstra network, believing it is securely communicated, is being intercepted through the network’s vulnerabilities?

Take my situation, for instance. Telstra has provided a list of documents they supposedly received as part of my arbitration claim. Alarmingly, this list is missing a staggering forty-three documents that I meticulously forwarded to the arbitrator for distribution to Telstra’s legal representatives. Even the most unethical arbitrator would find it hard to justify withholding such a significant amount of claim material. So, where exactly are those missing documents, and who is accountable for their disappearance?

Beyond the frustration of lost faxes, the real impact of my lost incoming phone calls reveals a far-reaching loss of revenue and opportunity. Despite having built a loyal clientele that has returned year after year for over a decade, losing eighty potential calls in just three months is not a loss I can absorb. Those eighty prospective customers may have now chosen to patronise competing holiday camps, sharing their experiences with friends and family, essentially siphoning away not just my immediate revenue but the long-term relationships I worked hard to cultivate. The sobering truth is that the Australian Government seems utterly powerless to tackle the pervasive influence of Telstra’s corporate management, which operates with an air of authority reminiscent of 'Big Brother.'

In this narrative of absentjustice.com, you will discover just how little the Government seemed to care when a small business operator like me raised a red flag about the alarming consequences of document loss within Telstra’s network. Had I been representing a powerhouse corporation like Ford Motor Company or BHP, I am sure my complaints would have been treated with the urgency and seriousness they deserved long ago.

This predicament is compelling on several levels, particularly when considering that, without the advocacy of Customers of Telstra (COTs), the Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman (TIO) might not exist today. Back in 1992, after numerous futile complaints were lodged with the Regulator about Telstra’s unwavering reluctance to resolve our issues, the Regulator, alongside the then-Labor Government, took decisive action to establish a dedicated ombudsman’s office for the telecommunications industry. Even Telstra’s leadership concedes that it was the relentless advocacy from the COTs that pushed for the establishment of this essential position. Lamentably, since late 1994, we have received an overwhelming number of complaints about the TIO—more than the grievances previously submitted to the Regulator when it handled issues with Telstra.

What’s even more unsettling is that the fifteen members of the TIO Board and Council come from Telstra and other telecommunications industry players, all of whom have vested interests in obscuring negative publicity. I have presented all fifteen members with ironclad evidence of a cover-up regarding my phone and fax faults. Despite this, the only responses I have received came from the Chairman of the Board, an executive associated with another major telecommunications company, and the Chairman of the Council, who is a former Liberal Government Minister, leaving me frustrated and questioning their commitment to transparency.

Additionally, one senior Board member from a non-Telstra operator has been persistently reaching out to the TIO since 1996, inquiring about when my unresolved billing matters will finally be addressed appropriately, but to no avail. On May 12, 2004, I received a standard letter from the TIO’s office, indicating that my evidence would be "passed on" to the Board by hand at the upcoming Council meeting scheduled for May 19, 2004. As I write this in June 2025, I still find myself waiting for any follow-up regarding that critical evidence. Who is truly covering for whom in this tangled web, and do the international parent companies represented on the TIO Board and Council even know about the existence of this troubling cover-up?

The Rupert Murdoch and Fox issue highlighted below is included because, in 2025, the vast majority of people who engage with the internet and enjoy television are well-acquainted with Mr. Murdoch and his influential media empire, Fox. I selected this topic for a closer examination due to the profound impact that such a corporation has on public opinion and the media landscape. 

In a different context, my quaint Cape Bridgewater Holiday Camp, though small and employing only four to five dedicated individuals, holds its own significance. Nestled in a beautiful coastal area, it plays a significant role in the local community, offering visitors a unique and memorable holiday experience.

 

The pervasive culture of corruption within Telstra has created a fertile ground for private companies to exploit both past and present mismanagement, allowing them to profit from Telstra's numerous failures. A striking illustration of this exploitation is the substantial $400 million fine levied against Telstra for its inability to complete the cable rollout for the Foxtel infrastructure. At that juncture, the Telstra Board was acutely aware that the compensation deadlines for the rollout, already burdened by rampant corrupt practices within the organisation, were utterly unrealistic. Millions of dollars had been misallocated and wasted, rendering timely completion nearly impossible. Nevertheless, in a move that starkly highlighted their disregard for both accountability and the welfare of the Australian public, they proceeded. They signed the deal, prioritising their own interests over the obligations owed to the people they serve.

If we accept the premise outlined in points 10 and 11 on pages 5164 and 5165 of the official Hansard records of the SENATE official Hansard – Parliament of Australia, which indicates that Telstra and its board were aware that the company would not meet the mandated rollout deadline, serious concerns arise. Why were the COT Cases—business owners who have struggled for years due to widespread and systemic telecommunications issues caused by Telstra—forced to bear the burden of hundreds of thousands of dollars in professional arbitration fees? These business owners sought the help of an arbitrator to ensure that Telstra would finally address the ongoing phone problems that were damaging their businesses. If this situation does not qualify as a form of severe discrimination, then what does? 

Clicking on the following government Senate Hansard records, SENATE official Hansard – Parliament of Australia, will take the visitor directly to the Australian Government secured archive records, where you can continue to read beyond points 10,11, and 12 

10. Telstra's CEO and Board have known about this scam since 1992. They have had the time and the opportunity to change the policy and reduce the cost of labour so that cable roll-out commitments could be met and Telstra would be in good shape for the imminent share issue. Instead, they have done nothing but deceive their Minister, their appointed auditors and the owners of their stockÐ the Australian taxpayers. The result of their refusal to address the TA issue is that high labour costs were maintained and Telstra failed to meet its cable roll-out commitment to Foxtel. This will cost Telstra directly at least $400 million in compensation to News Corp and/or Foxtel and further major losses will be incurred when Telstra's stock is issued at a significantly lower price than would have been the case if Telstra had acted responsibly. 

11.Telstra not only failed to act responsibly, it failed in its duty of care to its shareholders. So the real losers are the taxpayers and to an extent, the thousands of employees who will be sacked when Telstra reaches its roll-out targetÐcable past 4 million households, or 2.5 million households if it is assumed that Telstra's CEO accepts directives from the Minister.

12. The winners will be the purchasers of Telstra shares who can almost certainly expect to see a hefty increase in the price of their stock when Telstra finally delivers on its promise of reducing excessive labour costs. It remains to be seen whether executives responsible for the mess Telstra is in are accountable for their performance and whether our elected representatives, who are supposed to be in control, are willing to act to prevent further loss to the present owners of Telstra. 

My primary concern does not pertain to the compensation that Telstra was obligated to provide or whether they did supply the $400 million missed deadline in delivering all promised services to FOX. In several of the COT cases, Telstra made similar commitments to these Australian citizens, provided they financed their arbitrations to resolve ongoing telephone problems that were continuing to ruin their businesses. My arbitration fees between 23 November 1993 and 11 May 1995 cost me more than $ 300,000 in professional fees. Three hundred thousand dollars in 1994 is equivalent to $622,959,207 in 2025; yet, the arbitrator did not force Telstra to fix my telephone problems or those affecting the other members of our group, who are sadly known as the Casualties of Telstra. 

Clicking on the following government Senate Hansard records, SENATE official Hansard – Parliament of Australia, will take the visitor directly to the Australian Government secured archive records, where you can continue to read beyond points 29,30, 31 and 32 

29. Whether Telstra was active behind-the-scenes in preventing a proper investigation by the police is not known. What is known is that, at the time, Telstra had representatives of two law firms on its Board—Mr Peter Redlich, a Senior Partner in Holding Redlich, who had been appointed for 5 years from 2 December 1991 and Ms Elizabeth Nosworthy, a partner in Freehill Hollingdale & Page who had also been appointed for 5 years from 2 December 1991. One of the notes to and forming part of Telstra’s financial statements for the 1993- 94 financial year, indicates that during the year the two law firms supplied legal advice to Telstra totalling $2.7 million, an increase of almost 100 per cent over the previous year. Part of the advice from Freehill Hollingdale & Page was a strategy for "managing" the "Casualties of Telecom" (COT) cases.

30. The Freehill Hollingdale & Page strategy was set out in an issues paper of 11 pages, under cover of a letter dated 10 September 1993 to a Telstra Corporate Solicitor, Mr Ian Row from FH&P lawyer, Ms Denise McBurnie. The letter, headed "COT case strategy" and marked "Confidential," stated: "As requested I now attach the issues paper which we have prepared in relation to Telecom’s management of ‘COT’ cases and customer complaints of that kind. The paper has been prepared by us together with input from Duesburys, drawing on our experience with a number of ‘COT’ cases. . . .

" 31. The lawyer’s strategy was set out under four heads: "Profile of a ‘COT’ case" (based on the particulars of four businesses and their principals, named in the paper); "Problems and difficulties with ‘COT’ cases"; "Recommendations for the management of ‘COT’ cases; and "Referral of ‘COT’ cases to independent advisors and experts".  any admissions and, lawyers should be involved in any dispute that may arise, from beginning to end. "There are numerous advantages to involving independent legal advisers and other experts at an early stage of a claim," wrote Ms McBride. Eleven purported advantages were listed.

32. In particular, Ms McBride argued that the initial point of referral should always be the Corporate Solicitors Office, "in order to bring into operation the potential protection of legal professional privilege for documentation and other reporting procedures;" and the Corporate Solicitors Office should continue as "the point of referral and control in order to maintain legal professional privilege (where possible) over information and documentation created during the handling of the ‘COT’ case." If technical, fault reports were needed, these should be commissioned by the Corporate Solicitors Office and provided only to the Corporate Solicitors Office in "an attempt to create the initial protection of legal professional privilege for such reports." The Freehill Hollingdale & Page strategy was accepted. 33. Given information from businesses named in the strategy paper on what happened before and after the strategy was implemented, it appears that since 1992, Telstra has adopted a much more adversarial approach in dealing with complaints concerning service or any other form of criticism. This shift in corporate culture makes it more likely than not that in 1993, advice was also sought and received by the Telstra Board on the "management" of travel allowance fraud allegations

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.

The narratives above and below echo the recent British Government Post Office scandal. For more details, refer to the following link. Upon delving deeper into the Casualties of Telstra, one realises the striking resemblance to the UK Alan Bates vs. Post Office story. To watch the Australian television Channel 7 trailer for "Mr Bates vs. the Post Office," which went to air in Australia, →  Click here. The latest update on that terrible story is on YouTube at https://youtu.be/MyhjuR5g1Mc.   

This UK Post Office story sheds light on how sub-post office contractors were misled; some were even jailed and, tragically, led to suicides after encountering the might of the British Post Office, a government-owned organisation similar to Telstra. The COTs (Casualties of Telstra) were compelled into arbitration in 1994 with the assurance of receiving essential documents to substantiate their claims. Even thirty years later, in 2024, COT has yet to receive these critical documents.

 

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.