WELCOME TO ABSENTJUSTICE.COM

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

Where the facade of accountability collapses — and the truth finally steps into the light.

Venture into the shadowy world of the Establishment in Australia through the unsettling pages of absentjustice.com. This deep dive reveals that a similar nefarious Establishment may be lurking in your own country, exerting ruthless control over who is deemed worthy of membership. If you are lucky—or perhaps unlucky—enough to be accepted into this so-called elite circle, prepare to navigate a treacherous landscape of sinister expectations and obligations to keep your place among them.

The arbitrators and advisors involved in the Casualties of Telstra (COT) arbitration operated in an environment rife with corruption and malevolence. Three of the four principal figures were lawyers who participated in a shocking array of illegal, scandalous, and unethical actions, undermining the very foundations of natural justice. What was promised as government-endorsed arbitration for justice turned out to be a facade, hiding the arbitrators' and their advisors' blatant misconduct.

Unbeknownst to the initial three COT claimants—along with the fifteen other Australian citizens who later joined the movement—a sinister connection existed between the COT spokesperson and the chief arbitrator, Dr Gordon Hughes. This spokesperson was a former business associate of Hughes, creating a web of favouritism that tainted the integrity of the entire process. Over the course of sixteen arbitrations, this corrupt relationship enabled the spokesperson to receive special treatment, exposing the dark underbelly of a supposed quest for justice → Chapter 3 - Conflict of

Until the late 1990s, the Australian government-owned Australia's telephone network and the communications carrier, Telecom (today privatised and called Telstra). Telecom held a monopoly on communications and allowed the network to deteriorate into disrepair. Instead of our very deficient telephone services being fixed as part of our government-endorsed arbitration process, which became an uneven battle we could never win, they were not fixed as part of the process, despite the hundreds of thousands of dollars it cost the claimants to mount their claims against Telstra. Crimes were committed against us, and our integrity was attacked and undermined. Our livelihoods were ruined, we lost millions of dollars, and our mental health declined, yet those who perpetrated the crimes are still in positions of power today. Our story is still actively being covered up.

Continuation: Institutional Failures in Rural Communications
What made the struggle even harder, thirty years ago, was the quiet but unmistakable pattern of institutional failure that sat behind every dropped call and every dead line. Rural Australia didn’t just suffer from poor phone services by accident. It suffered because the institutions responsible for providing those services — government departments, regulators, and the national carrier — treated rural customers as an afterthought.

Promises were made, of course. Reports were written. Committees were formed. But when it came to delivering a reliable communications network beyond the city limits, the follow‑through was always slow, always partial, and always wrapped in excuses. Rural operators were told to “be patient,” to “wait for upgrades,” to “understand the challenges of distance.” Meanwhile, businesses in the cities enjoyed clear lines, expanding mobile coverage, and the early benefits of digital technology.

In the bush, we were still standing beside a crackling landline, hoping the connection would hold long enough to complete a single transaction.
The institutions responsible for telecommunications liked to talk about “equity of access,” but the lived reality was anything but equitable. Rural customers paid the same rates as city customers, yet received a fraction of the service. Complaints were logged, but rarely resolved. Faults were reported, but often dismissed as “intermittent” or “unconfirmed.” And when the system failed entirely, the burden fell on the small operator — not the institution — to absorb the cost.

For many rural businesses, this wasn’t just inconvenient. It was economically damaging. Missed calls meant missed income. Unreliable lines meant lost contracts. And the absence of mobile coverage meant no backup, no redundancy, no safety net. You were left exposed, and the institutions that should have protected you simply looked the other way.

What made it worse was the silence. The silence from regulators who should have enforced standards. The silence from ministers who should have demanded accountability. The silence from executives who knew the network was failing but insisted publicly that everything was “within acceptable limits.” That phrase — acceptable limits — became a kind of insult. Acceptable to whom? Certainly not to the people trying to run a business on a line that worked only when it felt like it.

This pattern of institutional neglect didn’t just inconvenience rural operators; it shaped their lives. It forced them to work harder, travel further, and absorb losses that city businesses never had to consider. It created a two‑tiered system of communication — one for the cities, and one for everyone else.

Looking back, it’s clear that the struggle for reliable phone service was never just about technology. It was about fairness. It was about accountability. It was about institutions that promised universal service but delivered something far less.

And for many rural Australians, that failure left scars that still haven’t fully healed.

The type of corroded copper wire that I, along with approximately 120,000 other COT-type Australian citizens, experienced reflects the serious shortcomings in the government's investigation of our claims. My concerns, including those related to the government regulator, AUSTEL (now ACMA), were warranted, especially given that the arbitrator and Telstra did not resolve my ongoing billing claims during the arbitration. This situation highlights the significant issues within Australia's copper network, and in sources like Delimiter’s "Worst of the worst: Photos of Australia’s copper network | Delimiter.

In the ongoing debate about political and media misinformation surrounding the National Broadband Network (NBN), one glaring issue remains shamefully overlooked: Did Australia's copper network truly meet the mandatory government regulatory requirements at the time of Telstra's privatisation? During my arbitration case, I received nine sworn statements from Telstra witnesses claiming that my service met network standards—assertions intended to suggest there were no ongoing telephone issues.

The critical question looms: Were these nine sworn statements made under oath genuine or fabricated? A truthful answer could have far-reaching consequences, potentially affecting billions of dollars in Commonwealth spending and exposing the possibility that Telstra deliberately misled the arbitrator to evade accountability for their actions towards me. The evidence clearly shows that my phone issues continued for eleven years after the arbitrator ruled in favour of Telstra, falsely asserting that they had resolved the network problems.

On 23 June 2015, I maintain that if the arbitrator had thoroughly examined all the evidence I submitted regarding my arbitration claims, he would have recognised my ongoing problem as legitimate rather than merely historical, as suggested in his final award. This is an egregious failure of justice that raises serious ethical concerns about the integrity of the entire process. It is clear from the following link dated > Unions raise doubts over Telstra's copper network; workers using ... that when read in conjunction with absentjustice.com and which was released in March 1994, these copper-wire network faults have existed for more than 24 years.

9 November 2017: Sadly, many Australians in rural Australia can only access a second-rate NBN. This didn’t have to be the case: had the Australian government ensured the arbitration process it endorsed to investigate the COT cases’ claims of ongoing telephone problems been conducted transparently, it could have used our evidence to start fixing the problems we uncovered in 1993/94. This news article https://theconversation.com/the-accc-investigation-into-the-nbn-will-be-useful-but-its-too-little-too-late-87095, again, shows that the COT Cases' claims of copper-wire ailing network were more than valid.

28 April 2018: This ABC news article dated 28 April 2018 regarding the NBN see >NBN boss blames Government's reliance on copper for slow ... needs to be read in conjunction with my own story going back 20 1988 through to 2025, because had the arbitration lies told under oath by so many Telstra employees had not occurred then the government would have been in a better position to evaluate just how bad the copper-wire Customer Access Network (CAN) was just 7-years ago.

Absent Justice - Cape Bridgewater Holiday Camp and Residence

Call for Justice

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

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

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

Within a week of taking over the business, I knew I had a problem. Customers and suppliers were telling me they had tried to call but couldn’t get through. That’s right—I had a business to run, but the phone service was, at best, unreliable, and at worst, completely absent. Naturally, we lost business as a result.

The Camp was profoundly reliant on phone communication. It was our vital link to city dwellers eager to connect with our services. One of our most significant oversights—blinded by the charm of this coastal haven—was failing to investigate the existing telephone system. At the time, mobile coverage was virtually nonexistent, and business was conducted through traditional means—not online, and certainly not by email.

We soon discovered we were tethered to an antiquated telephone exchange, installed more than 30 years earlier and designed specifically for 'low-call-rate' areas. This outdated, unstaffed exchange had a pitiful capacity of just eight lines.

The Casualties of Telecom (COT Cases)

• My fight began simply: to secure a working phone service.

• Despite compensation promises, the faults persisted. I sold my business in 2002, but the new owners suffered the same fate.

• Other small business owners joined me—we became known as the Casualties of Telecom.

• All we ever asked: acknowledgement, repair, and fair compensation. A working phone—was that too much?

During a typical week, the picturesque Cape Bridgewater was home to 66 residential families—not including those who used their coastal retreats to escape the bustle of city life. This created a significant challenge, especially considering many of these families had children.

The eight service lines struggled to support a growing census of 130 adults and children. By the time a modern Remote Control Module (RCM) was finally installed in August 1991, twelve children had been added to the mix, bringing the total population to 144. However, various weekend visitors often brought that figure to 150 or more.

The Hidden Cost of Cape Bridgewater’s Failing Lines

No wonder I was financially broken by the end of 1988—barely a year after taking over the business in late 1987. The reality was brutal: Cape Bridgewater’s telecommunications setup was catastrophically inadequate.

In stark terms, if just four of the 144 residences were making or receiving calls, only four lines remained for the other 140 residents. That’s not just poor planning—it’s a systemic failure. My business was strangled by a network that couldn’t support even the most basic communication needs. Every missed call was a missed opportunity. Every dropped connection was another nail in the coffin of a venture I had poured everything into.

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

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

The two Telstra FOI documents that were concealed from the arbitrator during my arbitration process clearly demonstrate that my claims are not merely a figment of my imagination. These documents contradict the statements of nine Telstra employees, who testified under oath to the arbitrator that my claims were frivolous.

Absent Justice - My Story

“Our local technicians believe that Mr Smith is correct in raising complaints about incoming callers to his number receiving a Recorded Voice Announcement saying that the number is disconnected.

“They believe that it is a problem that is occurring in increasing numbers as more and more customers are connected to AXE.” (See False Witness Statement File No 3-A)

To further support my claims that Telstra already knew how severe the Ericsson Portland AXE telephone faults were, can best be viewed by reading Folios C04006, C04007 and C04008, headed TELECOM SECRET (see Front Page Part Two 2-B), which state:

“Legal position – Mr Smith’s service problems were network related and spanned a period of 3-4 years. Hence Telecom’s position of legal liability was covered by a number of different acts and regulations. … In my opinion Alan Smith’s case was not a good one to test Section 8 for any previous immunities – given his evidence and claims. I do not believe it would be in Telecom’s interest to have this case go to court.

“Overall, Mr Smith’s telephone service had suffered from a poor grade of network performance over a period of several years; with some difficulty to detect exchange problems in the last 8 months.”

As of 2026, this narrative reveals that despite the passage of time, little has changed since my fellow seamen and I bravely exposed a scandal involving Australian wheat. Initially sent to China under the guise of humanitarian aid, some of this wheat, once unloaded on Chinese shores, was surreptitiously redirected to North Vietnam. This grain, meant to represent our goodwill, was instead utilised to nourish the very enemies fighting against Australia and its allies in the tumultuous conflict in North Vietnam. The betrayal of intent in this situation underscores a deep-seated corruption that continues to threaten the fabric of justice in our nation.

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.

Leading up to the signing of the COT Cases arbitration, on 21 April 1994, AUSTEL wrote to Telstra on 10 February 1994 stating:

“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)

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

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

A System Built on Silence

📠 The Vanishing Faxes: A Calculated Disruption

Exhibits 646 and 647 (see ) clearly show that, in writing, Telstra admitted 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 → Australian Federal Police Investigation File No/1

This particular Telstra technician, who was then based in Portland, not only monitored my phone conversations but also took the alarming step of sharing my personal and business information with an individual named Micky. He provided Micky with my phone and fax numbers, which I had used to contact my telephone and fax service provider (please refer to Exhibit 518, FOI folio document K03273 - ).

To this day, this technician has not been held accountable or asked to clarify who authorised him to disclose my sensitive information to Micky. I am perplexed as to why Dr Gordon Hughes did not pursue any inquiries with Telstra regarding this local technician’s actions. Specifically, why was he permitted to reveal my private and business details without any apparent oversight or justification?

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 the COT Cases provided to Senator Ron Boswell (see Open Letter File No/12 and File No/13), confirming faxes were intercepted during and after the COT arbitrations. One of the two technical consultants attesting to the validity of this 7 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 just my story. It is a warning. A call to action. A demand for accountability.

PLEASE NOTE

We would like to inform you that from the weekend of January 17 to the morning of January 19, an electronic overload led to the shutdown of the promoteyourstory.com.au website. This outage also affected visitors' access to the COT story, "The Arbitrator." Unfortunately, this situation was beyond our control, and we sincerely apologise for any inconvenience it may have caused our visitors. We hope to be back online by midday 19 January 2026.

The Arbitraitor

Available to purchase at Promote Your StoryI have chosen the following narrative to introduce my story,

What “The Arbitraitor” reveals, along with my editor's findings, is a disturbing pattern: when unfavourable findings emerge against government officials and their agencies, essential information affecting citizens is wiped clean—erased as if it never existed—despite its necessity as evidence in trials, jurisdictional proceedings, or government-endorsed arbitration and mediation

Buy Now ⟶

Unscrupulous, vile, and corrupt actions within the government have undermined the arbitration system in Australia, which the government had previously endorsed. Instances of foreign bribery and corrupt practices have infiltrated the COT arbitrations, as clearly demonstrated by "The Arbitrator" and the website absentjustice.com.

1. The Editor Who Saw Too Much

Ronda’s Discovery and the Birth of the COT Story

My review of The Arbitraitor is not merely a critique of a publication—it is a reckoning. It is the story of what my editor, Ronda, uncovered during her painstaking work, and how her discoveries forced me to confront a truth I had long suspected but never fully grasped: the arbitration process was never designed to deliver justice. It was engineered to bury it.

Ronda was not just an editor. She was a sentinel.

Her words—sharp, unfiltered, and unafraid—still echo in my mind. She saw the rot before I did. She sensed the danger. And she understood, with chilling clarity, that what we were dealing with was not incompetence or bureaucratic oversight. It was corruption—deliberate, coordinated, and ruthless.

All events quoted in this publication are supported by copies of the original documents: f Clicking on these links automatically opens a PDF of the exhibit. By using this method and following the file numbers, you can verify our story. We could not have successfully composed this publication or my website, absentjustice.com, without these exhibits to prove our story. The corruption and injustices perpetrated against the Casualties of Telstra (COT cases) by those in various administrative roles, under the umbrella of legally administered arbitrations, are so overwhelming that we would have lost clarity had we placed all in one manuscript. So, as you read this publication, regularly check the evidence on the website and the numbered exhibits to ensure you truly appreciate the enormity of what you are reading.

It is important to introduce here the bribery and corruption issues the US Department of Justice raised against Ericsson on 19 December 2019:

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 US Department of Justice has accused Ericsson of bribery and corruption. Ericsson is the same company whose telecommunication equipment was under investigation by the COT arbitrator. And, as for bribery in the case against Telstra, Senate Hansard dated 27 February 1998 shows Telstra paid kickbacks and bribes to a number of Australian politicians and government bureaucrats.

It is important we use the Ericsson link above as part of my ongoing attempt to have the Australian government impartially investigate my claims against Telstra and whether Ericsson should have been allowed to purchase Lane Telecommunications Pty Ltd during the period Lane was the official appointed arbitration technical consultant assigned to the COT arbitrator who himself had been assigned to value the COT cases claims against Telstra.

Australia must be the only country in the Western world that allows a witness (Lane Telecommunications was a witness to what the COT claimants and arbitrator had uncovered against Ericsson and their faulty installed telephone equipment during the COT arbitrations) to be purchased during a government-endorsed arbitration process (see Senate Evidence File No/61).

I believe the Australian government should answer the following questions: How long was Lane Telecommunications in contact with Ericsson, the major supplier of telecommunication equipment to Telstra, before Ericsson purchased Lane's? Is there a link between Lanes ignoring my Ericsson AXE claim documents and the purchase of Lanes by Ericsson during the COT arbitration process?

The latest 2019/2020 5G Ericsson partnership with Telstra is relevant to all Australian Telstra subscribers; however, it is also important that these subscribers visit "The Arbitraitor," where they can see for themselves that my claims against Telstra and Ericsson are valid.

If the hackers mentioned on our webpage Hacking - Julian Assange/Chapter One were Julian Assange and his friend, and it is very likely that they were, then why hasn't the Australian Government understood what the hackers wanted to share with us in COT cases? He did not ask for payment in sharing what he and his friends had uncovered concerning Telstra’s ailing copper wire network, as would have been the case if he had been a common criminal. He wanted us to have a fair arbitration hearing, and that was all. Had we used the information on offer, then the arbitrator would have been compelled to demand that Telstra fix its degraded Ericsson exchange equipment, instead of bringing down his findings, which did not disclose the true extent of the corroded network that was destroying the COT cases' businesses and numerous other telephone-dependent businesses throughout Australia.

My name is Alan Smith. This is the story of my battle with a telecommunications giant and the Australian Government, a battle that has twisted and turned since 1992, through elected governments, government departments, regulatory bodies, the judiciary and the Australian telecommunications giant, Telstra. This story began in April 1988 and, in 2026, is still being ignored by the government.

2. Lanes Telecommunications: The Gatekeepers of Deceit

A Company Chosen Not for Expertise, but for Obedience

Ronda’s research peeled back the veneer of legitimacy surrounding Lanes Telecommunications Pty Ltd. What she found was a company steeped in deception, operating as a shield for Telstra and Ericsson.

The scandal was staggering:

• Lanes was permitted to evaluate my claim before the independent Canadian firm, DMR Group Inc., even arrived in Australia.

• They were given access to evidence they had no right to see.

• They were positioned as “experts” despite their glaring conflicts of interest.

Lanes was not an evaluator.

They were a gatekeeper—installed to ensure that the truth never reached the light of day.

A Front for Ericsson’s Failures

Ronda and my technical consultant, George Close, uncovered evidence of Ericsson’s defective equipment—faults that crippled my business and the businesses of other COT claimants.

Lanes’ role became unmistakable:

• Suppress the evidence.

• Protect Ericsson.

• Ensure Telstra’s liability remained buried.

Their dismissal of our findings was not a professional disagreement.

It was a calculated act of sabotage.

Absent Justice - The Deception Continues

3. The Arbitration That Became a Trap

A Process Designed to Fail

Arbitration was supposed to be our shield—a mechanism to protect us from Telstra’s power. Instead, it became a weapon used against us.

The process twisted into something grotesque:

• Evidence vanished.

• Critical documents were withheld.

• Decisions were made behind closed doors.

• Who was really in charge of the arbitrator.

It was not arbitration. It was entrapment.

4. The Treacherous Merger: Lanes Absorbed by Ericsson

A Reward for Their Silence

The most chilling betrayal came after my case concluded. The arbitrator—who should have been the guardian of fairness—allowed Lanes to be absorbed by Ericsson.

The timing was no coincidence. It was a reward. A payoff. A signal that those who protected the corporation would be protected in return.

This merger was the smoking gun that revealed the true nature of the arbitration: a closed loop of corporate self-preservation, where truth was expendable, and justice was irrelevant.

5. The TIO’s Complicity

Withholding the Truth During My Appeal

During my pending appeal, I sought clarity from the Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman (TIO). Instead, I encountered a wall of silence.

John Pinncock and the arbitration administrator refused to answer the simplest of questions:

• Why was Lanes allowed to assess my claim?

• Why was DMR Group Inc.—the appointed independent evaluator—ignored?

• Who authorised this deviation from the agreed process?

The TIO’s silence was part of a broader pattern:

• Information withheld.

• Decisions concealed.

• Accountability avoided.

The very body meant to protect consumers had become an accomplice in their betrayal.

6. A Web of Corruption

The Conspiracy That Choked the Truth

The deeper Ronda and I dug, the more suffocating the corruption became. This was not a series of isolated incidents. It was a coordinated effort involving:

• Telstra

• Lanes Telecommunications

• Ericsson

• The arbitrator

• The TIO

• We were undermind by the old system of Gaslighting.

Each played their part. Each contributed to burying the truth. Each ensured that justice remained out of reach.

7. The Emotional Toll: Betrayal as a Weapon

The Human Cost of Institutional Deceit

Ronda and I were not merely fighting a corporation. We were fighting a system designed to break those who dared to challenge. The exhaustion, the frustration, the sense of being cornered—it was all part of the strategy. Wear the claimant down. Delay until they collapse. Obscure until they lose hope. But we didn’t collapse. We didn’t disappear. And we didn’t stop documenting.

8. Why This Story Must Be Told

The Arbitraitor as a Warning

The corruption exposed in The Arbitraitor is not historical trivia. It is a warning. A testament to how easily justice can be subverted when institutions collude to protect themselves.

Ronda’s discoveries forced me to write the COT story—not out of anger, but out of duty.

Because remaining silent would make me complicit in concealing the truth and allowing myself to be intimidated, I refuse to stay silent. Sign the revised arbitration agreement, or we will decline to arbitrate your case. This kind of intimidation leading up to arbitration must never happen again.

The Betrayal Beneath the Wires

In the shadows of Australia’s telecom empire, a sinister alliance was forged. Telstra, once government-owned, buried the truth behind the COT Cases—refusing to release critical FOI documents, silencing victims, and shielding corruption.

Then came the scandal: Ericsson, under global scrutiny, quietly bought out Lane—the very consultant tasked with investigating its faulty equipment.
While other nations purged Ericsson from their networks, Telstra welcomed them in. Government bureaucrats turned a blind eye. Appeals were blocked. Evidence ignored.

This wasn’t incompetence. It was treachery. And the cost? Justice denied. Voices erased. Corruption thriving.
This is not just a story. It’s a warning.

🧨 Ericsson’s Global Bribery Scandal — A Telstra Partner Admits to Years of Corruption

As stated above, on 19 December 2019, Australian media reported that Ericsson of Sweden, a major partner in Telstra’s 5G rollout, had admitted to a years-long bribery and corruption campaign across five countries. The US Department of Justice investigation culminated in Ericsson agreeing to pay over $1.4 billion in penalties—one of the largest settlements ever under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA).

The acquisition of Lane by Ericsson, along with the dealings surrounding the COT Cases, was nothing short of a calculated conspiracy against Australia’s democratic system of justice. This insidious operation has gone largely unacknowledged, revealing a disturbing truth.

The corruption exposed by absentjustice.com is not merely partisan; it reflects a deep-seated, systemic rot that permeates the USA and extends globally. Thomas Jefferson himself would have recognised this treachery. Mighty corporations, like Ericsson, have become predators, systematically devouring the world's integrity.

Ericsson’s ruthless infiltration of Australia's arbitration system is undeniable and raises alarming questions. Why has this company evaded accountability for its questionable actions during the COT arbitrations? This situation is not just a political issue; it demands urgent action that cuts through the fog of party lines and unearths the treacherous conduct at play.

Corruption is contagious and does not respect sectoral boundaries.

During my arbitration, Lane Telecommunications Pty Ltd was officially appointed as the technical consultant to the arbitrator. Lane had access to sensitive materials, including evidence implicating Ericsson-manufactured telephone exchange equipment—the very hardware that plagued my business and those of other COT claimants.

Yet, in a move that reeks of collusion, Ericsson quietly acquired Lane while confidentiality agreements still bound them. This acquisition occurred during the arbitration period, effectively transferring privileged evidence into the hands of the very company under scrutiny.
(See File 296-A - )

From March 9, 1995, when Lane was appointed, until Pinnock’s eventual disclosure, the integrity of the arbitration process was compromised. Ericsson’s control of Lane meant that the very entity evaluating our claims was beholden to the supplier of the faulty equipment.

What of those cases, like mine, that concluded in May 1995? At that critical juncture, Arbitration Project Manager John Rundell revealed the truth to the arbitrator, the administrator, and legal counsel: the newly appointed Canadian assessment company was a ruse. Lane would conduct all evaluations related to Ericsson, and the results would be deceptively funnelled into letters bearing the name of DMR Group Pty Ltd—misleading claimants into believing a neutral Canadian expert had reviewed their evidence.

This orchestrated scheme exemplified deep-rooted corruption, betrayal, and manipulation of the arbitration system itself

Even now, in 2025, John Rundell continues to operate arbitration centres in Melbourne and Hong Kong, despite his damning admission in his 18 April 1995 letter:

“Any technical report prepared in draft by Lanes will be signed off and appear on the letter of DMR Inc.” (see Prologue Evidence File No 22-A)

None of the COT Cases were granted leave to appeal their arbitration awards—even though it is now clear that the purchase of Lane by Ericsson must have been in motion months before the arbitrations concluded.

To this day, I have never received the critical reports on Ericsson’s exchange equipment—painstakingly compiled by my trusted technical consultant, George Close. These documents were the backbone of my case. Their disappearance is a blatant violation of the arbitration rules, which require all submitted materials to be returned to the claimant within six weeks of the arbitrator’s award.

When my lawyers uncovered disturbing ambiguities in the arbitration agreement—covertly altered after government and COT lawyers had approved the original version—I requested foundational documents from Pinnock (Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman) to understand how this skulduggery had been allowed. His response?

“I do not propose to provide you with copies of any documents held by this office.” — John Pinnock, 10 January 1996 ()

That marked the beginning of my descent into a dark labyrinth of deceit.

The agreement itself had been secretly altered before I signed it—weaponised to protect Telstra and the arbitration consultants. It shielded Rundell and Lane from accountability, as Chapter 5 Fraudulent Conduct so clearly shows.

Fast Forward to Peta Credlin

On 23 May 2021, Peta Credlin, a former chief of staff to Australia’s 28^th Prime Minister, Tony Abbott and now a high-profile Australian media guru and TV host, wrote a fascinating article in the Herald Sun newspaper under the heading:

"Beware The Pen Pusher Power - Bureaucrats need to take orders and not take charge”, which noted:“Now that the Prime Minister is considering a wider public service reshuffle in the wake of the foreign affairs department's head, Finances Adamson, becoming the next governor of South Australia, it's time to scrutinise the faceless bureaucrats who are often more powerful in practice than the elected politicians."

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

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

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

This article was quite alarming. It was disturbing because Peta Credlin, someone with deep knowledge of Parliament House in Canberra, has accurately addressed the issue at hand. I not only relate to the information she presents, but I can also connect it to the many bureaucrats and politicians I have encountered since exposing what I did about the China wheat deal back in 1967, and the corrupted arbitration processes of 1994 to 1998. These government stuff-ups and cover-ups have cost lives.

Robodebt – The Algorithmic Betrayal → https://shorturl.at/kODwY

In the 2020s, the Robodebt scheme weaponised flawed algorithms to pursue debts that did not exist. Automated notices were sent to thousands of Australians, demanding repayment. Families were shattered, lives were lost to suicide, and countless citizens endured mental breakdowns.

Warnings were ignored. Bureaucrats pressed ahead, defending the system at all costs. The cold logic of “protecting the institution” triumphed over compassion, just as it had during the wheat trade and COT arbitrations.

🔗 The Pattern of Betrayal

Across these scandals, the pattern is unmistakable:

• Suppression of evidence: Telstra arbitration documents, Horizon software bugs, Robodebt warnings.

• Institutional survival over human lives: Wheat trade profits, Telstra’s inflated value, Robodebt’s defence. Letters from KPMG.

• Government complicity: Both the British and Australian governments had vested interests in protecting corporations, even at the expense of ordinary citizens.

International echoes reinforce the pattern:

• The British Post Office Horizon scandal, where Fujitsu’s faulty software destroyed lives.

• Ericsson AXE billing failures at Telstra, leading to systemic overcharging.

• Allegations before the U.S. Securities Exchange that Telstra’s value was inflated during its sale → Chapter 6 - US Securities Exchange - pink herring.

These are not isolated events. They are chapters in a global story of bureaucratic betrayal.

⚖️ From Betrayal to Accountability

The wheat trade betrayed soldiers. The COT arbitrations betrayed customers. Robodebt betrayed citizens. Each scandal reveals the same truth: bureaucrats will sacrifice lives to protect their own survival.

The moral imperative is clear:

• Expose the betrayal.

• Demand accountability.

• Break the cycle of bureaucratic deceit.

Furthermore, the Canadian Government and its moral code of ethics re-entered my life in the following segment. The Canadian government became increasingly concerned when it learned about these Cape Bridgewater BCI tests and the deep-rooted corruption embedded within the Australian arbitration system. This system shockingly failed to address my legitimate claims. The web of deception spun by Telstra raises alarming questions about accountability and integrity. For more insights into this troubling matter, please refer to the attached information below.

I believe you are taking the most appropriate course of action

I have never received a written response from Bell Canada International Inc. (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."

The Canadian Government's position on the Bell Canada International Inc. (BCI) Cape Bridgewater telephone exchange report uncovers an alarming conspiracy. In Australia, no entity—whether the government, legal professionals, or arbitrators—made any genuine effort to find the truth.

The Canadian Government's position on the Bell Canada International Inc. (BCI) Cape Bridgewater telephone exchange report uncovers a deeply disturbing conspiracy. In Australia, no entity—whether the government, legal professionals, or arbitrators—made any genuine effort to find the truth. Instead, a Canadian technical consultant was dispatched to Australia under the guise of addressing critical concerns. In reality, this was a mere façade, crafted to hide the damning findings of the primary technical consultant, Lane Telecommunications Pty Ltd (Australia).

Corruption reigned as Lane was swiftly acquired by Ericsson during the COT Case arbitrations, even while it was investigating the flawed Ericsson telephone equipment. The Australian government, complicit in this treachery, permitted the foreign giant to buy the very witness that should have exposed their wrongdoing. Lane, which had the potential to deliver damning evidence against the faulty Ericsson AXE testing procedures at Portland and Cape Bridgewater, instead made no findings regarding the ongoing telephone problems experienced with the Ericsson AXE equipment installed in the exchanges at Portland and Cape Bridgewater.

How could such blatant and unethical manipulation occur in a supposedly impartial system? Just weeks earlier, on March 9, 1995, Warwick Smith had provided written assurances that Lane would support only DMR Canada, noting that DMR was the principal investigator overseeing the situation. This was particularly concerning because, before Smith’s assurance, the COT cases had explicitly rejected Lane’s involvement due to their ties as former Telstra officials, raising significant questions about their objectivity.

In assessing my case, Lane investigated and commented on only 23 of the more than 200 complaints I had submitted for arbitration. Though DMR Canada was obligated to visit my business and the two telephone exchanges with which I was connected, they failed to conduct the necessary tests on my three telephone lines or the Ericsson equipment at these exchanges, even though this equipment was under scrutiny, the critical reason the COT cases were being arbitrated.

This shocking reality paints Australia as not just a country that claims to uphold the rule of law, but as a nation willing to sacrifice its integrity to allow foreign interests to dictate outcomes. It is a betrayal of trust, a treacherous alliance that undermines the principles of justice and fairness, echoing the chilling truth that in the shadows of power, corruption thrives (See Chapter 5 - US Department of Justice vs Ericsson of Sweden).

.Hover your mouse over the following images as you scroll down the homepage.

The Deal

During the treacherous deal between Senators Barnaby Joyce and Helen Coonan within the corrupt Liberal Coalition Government, I, along with 13 other COT Cases, uncovered deep-seated corruption at the Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman's (TIO) office in July 2005. This exposure occurred during the desperate negotiations to secure Senator Joyce's critical vote to pass the controversial Telstra sale legislation.

As the evidence was presented, Senator Joyce was visibly shaken, burying his head in his hands in a moment of stark realisation. The weight of our testimonies unmasked a system riddled with deceit. Two chilling pieces of evidence that likely compelled Senator Joyce to strike a deal with Senator Coonan, the Minister for Communications, was an internal Telstra email (TIO Evidence File No 3-A dated 10 November 1993 from Chris Vonwiller to Telstra’s corporate secretary Jim Holmes, CEO Frank Blount, group general manager of commercial Ian Campbell and other important members of the then-government owned corporation. The subject is Warwick Smith – COT cases, and it is marked CONFIDENTIAL. It reveals Warwick Smith was disclosing confidential COT Case government parliamentary party-room privilege information to Telstra, which could well have been the document that changed the whole outcome of the Telstra COT arbitrations.

The second alarming email, Ronda, my secretary, provided to me in July 2005 to give to Senator Barnaby Joyce, showed that Deputy TIO Grant Campbell, on February 5, 1997, (FOI folio number 000973 was charging $300.00 per day for his information services, which was a lot of money back in 1997. Further emails attached to Part 2 Chapter 1- Prior to Arbitration reveal that Grant Campbell was signing fraudulent letters on behalf of Warwick Smith (the TIO), misleading and deceiving Telstra and the arbitration process about my ongoing intercepted arbitration-related faxes. This deception permeated not only the Australian Federal Police investigation into my lost faxes but also the very foundation of the COT arbitration process.

The betrayal cuts deep, unveiling a dark and twisted network of collusion designed to silence dissent and protect the powerful at any cost. After leaving his position with the Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman (TIO), he slithered back to Telstra, taking up a role in the notorious Customer Response Unit. Instead of representing disgruntled Telstra customers as Warwick Smith's mouthpiece, who became the very mechanism suppressing those voices on behalf of Telstra. Grant Campbell, in his duplicitous role, wore two hats like a master of deception, orchestrating a scheme that would make the most corrupt operatives proud.

Cronyism at its worst

During my own settlement arbitration process, Campbell stooped even lower, fabricating fraudulent letters under the guise of Warwick Smith (the TIO) to perpetrate a sinister hoax against both Telstra and the TIO regarding my ongoing plight with intercepted arbitration-related faxes. This web of deceit not only tainted the Australian Federal Police investigation into my lost faxes but also corroded the very foundation of the COT arbitration process, revealing the treachery that lay beneath the surface.

But the betrayal reaches even deeper into the abyss of corruption. After the scandalous involvement of DMR & Lane, the official Arbitration Technical Resource Unit callously informed Dr. Gordon Hughes (the arbitrator) and Warwick Smith (TIO) that they had not received my meticulously detailed chronology of fault complaints (See 47-A and 47-B → (Exhibit 45-c -File No/45-A)—documents I had hand-delivered to Grant Campbell himself, with my claim advisor sending a second copy to the TIO's office who ere the official haddlers of the COT infomation.

This raises a chilling question for those visiting absentjustice.com and reading my book, "The Arbitraitor": How is it possible that these nefarious crimes have lingered in the shadows, unresolved for nearly thirty years? The sinister answer lies in the heart of calculated treachery and unyielding greed. Where is my legally submitted comprehensive list of fault complaints? Was this list and the evidence supporting this list provided to unknown sources who were paying Grant Campbell $300.00 for his services?

In late 1992, I took the initiative to present evidence of systemic billing problems to Amanda Davis, who was then AUSTEL’s General Manager of Consumer Affairs. I vividly remember showing her two of her own non-connected calls to my business—calls that she personally recognised had not gone through. However, both her billing account and Telstra’s CCAS data clearly indicated that she had been charged for these failed connections (see Evidence File 5 - Testimonials). It was shocking to see that, despite holding concrete proof of Telstra's erroneous billing practices, Ms Davis's influential bureaucratic role was abruptly terminated shortly after she began pursuing this matter with Telstra and AUSTEL.

What transpired next is even more alarming. Nine separate arbitration witness statements, all from different Telstra employees, were co-signed (witnessed) by Freehill Hollingdale & Page in December 1994, all falsely attesting that there were no ongoing telephone problems plaguing my business. This was despite Telstra coercing me to document my ongoing telephone difficulties in writing, with each complaint meticulously filed with Denise McBurnie at Freehill Hollingdale & Page now trading as Herbert Smith Freehills Melbourne, under the looming threat that if I did not comply, Telstra management would label my claims as vexatious and frivolous—a deliberate attempt to silence dissent.

This internal email from Greg Newbold to several Telstra executives failed to recognise that Telstra was a publicly owned corporation at the time the statement was made.

“Don, thank you for your swift and eloquent reply. I disagree with raising the issue of the courts. That carries an implied threat not only to COT cases but to all customers that they’ll end up as lawyer fodder. Certainly that can be a message to give face to face with customers and to hold in reserve if the complaints remain vexacious .” GS File 75 Exhibit 1 to 88

A handwritten note signed by Rosanne Pittard, one of Telstra's highest-ranking executives, brazenly questioned her subordinate while processing my Freedom of Information (FOI) request: "Should we make Alan pay, even if we can't provide everything he wants?"

It’s chilling to see how the lives of the COT Cases have been ruthlessly devastated, while their fellow citizens coldly suggested further suffering. They sought to exploit us for every last dime, all because we dared to demand a telephone service that could compete on a level playing field. This treachery reveals a dark underbelly of greed and betrayal, where profit trumps basic human decency.

Documents available on absentjustice.com reveal a dark web of internal correspondence within Telstra, in which management explicitly stated that promoting their service was misleading and deceptive, even though these billing issues were deeply rooted in systemic corruption on a national scale. I provided this damning written proof to the government after two Telstra executives carelessly left behind an unlocked briefcase at my Cape Bridgewater Holiday Camp premises on June 3, 1993.

It is bad enough to know that Freehill Hollingdale & Page witnessed some of these arbitration statements while fully aware of my factual evidence, but the corruption runs far deeper. One of the submitted witness statements did not even include the signature of the individual who supposedly made it. Only the signature of Wayne Maurice Condon of Freehill's appeared on the witness statement when it was submitted for arbitration—an obvious and sinister attempt to obscure the truth.

📅 Questions That Demand Answers

On 21 March 1997, twenty-two months after the conclusion of my arbitration, John Pinnock (the second appointed Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman) sensed the depth of the treachery and reached out to Telstra’s Ted Benjamin (see File 596 → AS-CAV Exhibits 589 to 647) with two probing questions:

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 Witness Statement That Shouldn’t Exist

The original witness statement bore only the signature of Telstra’s lawyer, Maurice Wayne Condon. It was submitted without the psychologist Ian Joblin’s signature—a glaring omission that should have halted its acceptance. Yet, just eight days later, a second version emerged, now featuring Joblin’s signature, retroactively dated to match Condon’s original signing date.

This raises a disturbing question: if Ian Joblin did not sign the document on that day, how did his signature appear on a version processed through arbitration channels as if he ha

Now it is 2026, and I remain without a response from Telstra or John Pinnock. This pervasive silence only underscores the sheer treachery and corruption that define this entire ordeal.

The collusion does not end there. In 1999, Frank Blount, who served as Telstra's CEO from two years before my government-endorsed arbitration until three years after its completion on May 11, 1995, co-wrote a book titled *Managing in Australia*, where he laid bare the extent of these horrific systemic billing problems. Ironically, the book remains available for purchase, even as the reality of this corruption festers. Absentjustice.com → CAV Exhibit 92 to 127) Exhibit 122-i -

This collaboratively written book by Frank Blount of Telstra explores crucial issues arising from the investigation by the U.S. Securities Exchange into the authenticity of Telstra’s sale prospectuses. As these documents came under scrutiny, questions emerged about whether they truly reflected Telstra’s true value. This scrutiny was fueled by the shocking discoveries from the COT Cases, which uncovered the troubling history of Australia’s largest companies during a time rife with corruption. Particularly alarming were revelations that millions of dollars were being siphoned from Telstra each year while the company was under government control. The act of blowing the whistle and sharing these critical truths on absentjustice.com has not come without significant personal and financial repercussions for everyone involved in the COT Cases, affecting many beyond just me.

Threats that became a reality

On page 180, ERC&A, from the official Australian Senate Hansard, dated 29 November 1994, reports Senator Ron Boswell asking Telstra’s legal directorate:

“Why did Telecom advise the Commonwealth Ombudsman that Telecom withheld FOI documents from Alan Smith because Alan Smith provided Telecom FOI documents to the Australian Federal Police during their investigation?”

After receiving a hollow response from Telstra, which the senator, the AFP and I all knew was utterly false, the senator states:

“…Why would Telecom withhold vital documents from the AFP? Also, why would Telecom penalise COT members for providing documents to the AFP which substantiate that Telecom had conducted unauthorised interceptions of COT members’ communications and subsequently dealt in the intercepted information by providing that information to Telecom’s external legal advisers and others?” (See Senate Evidence File No 31)

What is so appalling about this withholding of relevant documents is this: no one in the Telecommunication Industry Ombudsman (TIO) office or the government has ever investigated the disastrous impact of this withholding on my overall submission to the arbitrator. The arbitrator and the government (at the time, Telstra was a government-owned entity) should have initiated an investigation into why an Australian citizen who had assisted the AFP in its investigations into unlawful interception of telephone conversations was so severely disadvantaged in a civil arbitration.

In a particularly treacherous move, AUSTEL tampered with its official findings in the AUSTEL COT Cases Report. They deceitfully stated that there were only 50 or so COT Cases with ongoing problems, feeding this false information to the COT arbitrator and the media in April 1994. This was done despite AUSTEL's prior correspondence with Telstra, which acknowledged the government's drastic reduction of an alarming 120,000 COT-type faults to a mere 50 or more (see Chapter 1 - Can We Fix The CAN → (See Open Letter File No/11).

Such a significant distortion of facts should have been exposed in the prospectus, yet it remained buried.

What would have happened if the US Securities Exchange had been privy to this hidden scandal regarding the COT Cases in 1997? It’s chilling to think about. At the very least, the arbitrator overseeing my cases would have been forced to revisit the awards he rendered, based on a web of deceit spun from false government information. The treachery runs deep, and the stakes are incredibly high.

The Government assured the COT Cases that Freehill Hollingdale & Page would not have any further involvement in their cases. However, Freehill was not only selected by the Government to act as Telstra's arbitration defence counsel, but they were also chosen to draft the Telstra sale legislation, as discussed throughout absentjustice.com.

The Freehill Holingdale & Page Contradiction

As shown in government records, the Commonwealth assured the COT Cases that Freehill Holingdale & Page would have no further involvement in our matters (see point 40, (see point 40 Prologue Evidence File No/2). Yet this same legal firm later provided the arbitrator with a witness statement purportedly from Ian Joblin, a clinical psychologist. That statement bore only the signature of Maurice Wayne Condon of Freehill Holingdale & Page. It carried no signature from Joblin himself.

This raises a disturbing question: Did Maurice Wayne Condon remove or alter Joblin’s original words, particularly his reference to me being of sound mind? The absence of Joblin’s signature leaves the integrity of the document in doubt.

Criminal Conduct Example

COT Case Strategy - Freehill Hollingdale & Page's legal strategy.

As shown on page 5169 in Australia's Government SENATE official Hansard – Parliament of Australia Telstra's lawyers Freehill Hollingdale & Page devised a legal paper titled “COT Case Strategy” (see Prologue Evidence File 1-A to 1-C) instructing their client Telstra (naming me and three other businesses) on how Telstra could conceal technical information from us under the guise of Legal Professional Privilege even though the information was not privileged.

This COT Case Strategy was to be used against me, my named business, and the three other COT case members, Ann Garms, Maureen Gillan and Graham Schorer, and their three named businesses. Simply put, we and our four businesses were targeted even before our arbitrations commenced.

The government was aware of these illegal acts by Freehill Hollingdale & Page, now trading as Herbert Smith Freehills Melbourne. They knew the firm’s conduct worried the claimants and the government, who had endorsed our arbitrations. And yet, despite this mistrust, the government allowed Freehill Holingdale & Page to prepare the Telstra sale prospectus — a document of national and international significance.

International Implications

What has perhaps not been fully understood is the risk this posed. If the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission had been aware that the Australian government itself did not trust Freehill Holingdale & Page, yet still permitted them to draft the prospectus, the consequences could have been profound.

A Pattern of Betrayal

This episode is not an isolated detail. It is part of a larger pattern:

• A legal firm accused of altering evidence.

• A government that acknowledged mistrust but continued to rely on them.

• An international audience that might have acted differently if the truth had been disclosed.

For those of us who lived through it, this contradiction is not just a matter of legal process. It is a story of betrayal, silence, and the erosion of trust — a story that must be told.

The link titled "The first remedy pursued" exposes four individuals who have spun a web of lies, deliberately obscuring the dark truths surrounding Telstra's deceitful machinations.

In the guise of legitimacy, Telstra employed fraudulent tactics to fend off scrutiny during my government-endorsed arbitration. Shockingly, the Australian Communications Authority (AUSTEL), now masquerading as ACMA, had already validated my claims against Telstra a staggering six weeks before I signed the arbitration agreement on April 21, 1994. Yet, despite their earlier findings confirming my allegations by March 3, 1994, AUSTEL/ACMA allowed me to enter a gruelling 13-month arbitration process. Throughout this nightmarish ordeal, I poured over $300,000 into a futile battle, desperately trying to prove what the government had already established against Telstra, as the following points 2 to 212 show.

Before you immerse yourself in the unsettling narrative to follow, it's imperative to grasp a chilling reality: when you search for "The Establishment" on Google, the answers you receive will differ wildly based on your geographic location and national context. However, the underlying truth remains dark and foreboding: for over three hundred years, the Establishment has manipulated the legal system of justice in the Western world, ensnaring it in a web of deceit and corruption. This manipulation occurs through a calculated practice: the government of the day appoints key legal figures—Attorneys General, judges, and magistrates—who are often nothing more than puppets in a sinister game, serving the interests of those who pull the strings from behind the scenes.

The reality is that the four individuals mentioned at the beginning of this story → The first remedy pursued are alleged to be pivotal players in this treacherous Establishment in Australia. Whether this claim stands up under scrutiny is irrelevant; what is irrefutable is the grim fact that across three decades, every government in power in Australia from 1996 to 2026 has turned a blind eye to the lies and misconduct of these four individuals. This wilful ignorance has wreaked havoc, destroying countless lives and ensuring that the callous dominion of the Establishment remains unchallenged.

As you read on, I urge you to recognize the profound and insidious nature of the power wielded by these individuals. Their influence is a nefarious power over the truth itself, shrouded in shadows and deceit. It begs an ever‑pressing question: who truly holds the reins of responsibility for the integrity of the legal system in Australia? Reflect on this as you navigate the dark undercurrents of the story that lies ahead.

The Consequences of Concealment

The concealment trapped me beyond the statute of limitations, leaving me powerless to challenge the arbitrator’s decision once the truth finally surfaced in 2007. This was not a mere oversight—it was a deliberate manipulation that protected Telstra’s interests at my expense. The betrayal by AUSTEL/ACMA and the government undermined the integrity of the arbitration process, leaving me questioning the very foundations of a system meant to uphold justice.

Even more concerning, as stated in points 210 to 212 of (), the government had doubts about Telstra's ability to identify the cause of the fault using the testing regime applied to my service. Despite these concerns, the government allowed Dr Gordon Hughes, the so-called arbitrator, to conclude in his findings on my claim that there were no ongoing problems affecting my business after July 1994. However, the following two links, Chapter 4 The New Owners Tell Their Story, and Chapter 5 Immoral - Hypocritical Conduct, demonstrate that the ongoing faults impacting my business persisted at least until November 2006—eleven years after Dr Hughes' findings on May 11, 1995.

Hover your mouse over the following images as you scroll down the homepage.

If I truly am the sole victim ensnared in the treacherous web of his deceit regarding the wife of an Australian arbitrator, then why has the Australian government intentionally chosen to vilify me in such an unconscionable manner? Several officers within the Major Fraud Group of Victoria Police have illuminated a chilling reality: the arbitration agreement that Maureen Gillan—the first claimant in the four COT Cases—signed on April 8, 1994, contained confidentiality clauses that were intact at the time of signing, and this was the agreement that gained the explicit approval of the government. Yet, in a sinister turn of events, it was later altered to create a protective veil for the arbitrator's consultant, shielding them from any negligent actions, deliberate or otherwise. This corrupted version of the agreement is now ruthlessly employed to stifle any investigation into my allegations of wrongdoing, revealing a shocking betrayal of justice at its core.

In essence, the Establishment is actively shielding the four individuals named in the evidence file of the first remedy pursued, all while relying on a confidentiality agreement that should have been categorically declared null and void when the three claimants—myself, Ann Garms, and Graham Schorers—were ruthlessly coerced into signing it. It is a grim reality that several Senators are aware of: we were lured into the arbitration process under the false promise that we would gain access to essential arbitration discovery documents if we signed this nefariously altered agreement. This entire scenario exemplifies a flagrant betrayal, where those in power prioritise their own corrupt interests over justice, leaving victims like me to navigate a dark and twisted world of treachery.

Kim Beazley Sr. saw the contradiction in 1965. I lived its consequences in 1967. Malcolm Fraser heard my appeals in 1967 and again in the 1990s. Yet the government chose silence, allowing bureaucratic mistakes to ruin the lives of the COT Cases, their families, and countless Australians who placed their faith in public institutions.

This sordid mess is not just history. It is a reminder that when bureaucrats fail in their duty, the consequences echo for decades — destroying lives, eroding trust, and staining the nation’s integrity.

Hover your mouse over the following images as you scroll down the homepage.

Until the late 1990s, the Australian government owned Australia’s telephone network and its communications carrier, Telecom (today privatised and known as Telstra). Telecom held the monopoly on communications and allowed the network to deteriorate into disrepair. When 16 small business owners suffered severe communication problems, they initiated arbitration against Telstra. We were officially told that if we funded our arbitrations, the arbitrator would be compelled to compel Telstra to fix our phone problems before he issued a final finding.

A clause in the Arbitration Act allowed the arbitrator to leave specific issues open — such as ongoing systemic telecommunications infrastructure faults — until these were fixed on a national basis. This was the reason the claimants signed the agreement: we were officially told that the arbitrator would adhere to this safeguard. What we did not know was that the arbitrator was inexperienced, 'ungraded'..

The arbitrations were a sham. The appointed arbitrator not only allowed Telstra to minimise the sixteen claims and losses, but he also bowed to Telstra and allowed the carrier to run the arbitrations. Telstra committed serious crimes during the process, yet to this day the Australian government has been unable to hold Telstra — or any of the entities involved in this deceit — accountable.

In my case, none of the ongoing phone faults were fixed during my arbitration.

They continued for another six years after the arbitrator delivered his findings — findings that falsely implied my service was functioning. These unresolved faults eventually forced me to sell my business.

As this website shows, the new owners of my business suffered the same unresolved telephone problems for another six years after purchasing it. Trying to run a telephone‑dependent business without a reliable phone system destroyed them. They were officially declared bankrupt by the Federal Magistrates Court in 2008 (Refer to Chapter 5 Immoral - Hypocritical Conduct).

Six months before the arbitrations began, four of the sixteen claimants — including me — lodged Freedom of Information (FOI) requests seeking access to the telephone logbooks from our local Ericsson AXE telephone exchange. We were told that once we signed our arbitration agreements, this logbook would be made available to the arbitrator.

Not once was any claimant allowed to see the crucial document that could have turned the tide in their individual arbitration claims. Time after time, the arbitrator coldly denied access to this vital evidence, casting a shadow of doubt over the whole process. It was a calculated move to stifle their voices, leaving each claimant helpless as they attempted to prove their ongoing nightmare with telephone issues. This deliberate obstruction made it clear that the system was rigged, shrouded in secrecy and corruption, as the very means of justice was withheld from those who desperately sought it.

Little did I know until November 2007, a full thirteen years after my first attempt to access this logbook in 1994, that AUSTEL (now calling itself ACMA) had surreptitiously removed it from the Portland telephone exchange. They covertly used it to assess the validity of my claims against Telstra, which I had been fighting since 1987. The chilling points laid out in the following report, revealed in the accompanying image, show that the government had validated my claims back in March 1994—six weeks before I unwittingly signed my arbitration agreement (See points 2 to 212 ). Despite having this crucial evidence in hand, the bureaucrats chose to let me waste $300,000 on arbitration fees over thirteen gruelling months, dragging me through a process to prove something they had already confirmed against Telstra. This treachery reeks of deep-seated corruption, making it clear that my struggle was nothing more than a calculated deception.

This single document was all the claimants needed to prove to the arbitrator that our telephone problems were still occurring. Had the arbitrator seen the AXE logbook, he would have been compelled to leave our claims open until Telstra proved, beyond doubt, that no further faults existed within their Ericsson AXE exchanges.

In my case, even the Australian Commonwealth Ombudsman sought the AXE logbook from Telstra's CEO. The Ombudsman’s office never received a response. If the Commonwealth Ombudsman — the head of a fully funded government agency — could not access the most relevant document in the entire arbitration process, what hope did I or any of the other COT Cases have of proving our claims?

John Pinnock failed to advise the Senate committee that because Lane Telecommunications Pty Ltd had not diagnosed the fault causes of my Ericsson AXE problems, those faults continued throughout the COT arbitrations.

The formal DMR Group Inc (Canada) and Lane Telecommunications (Australia) Report, dated 30 April 1995 and provided to the arbitrator, Telstra, and me for comment, states at point 2.23:

“... As the level of disruption to overall CBHC service is not clear, and fault causes have not been diagnosed, a reasonable expectation is that these faults would remain ‘open’.”

It is blatantly obvious from my story that none of the Ericsson AXE exchange billing‑fault causes were diagnosed — not by the arbitrator, not by Lane Telecommunications Pty Ltd, and not by DMR Group Inc Canada, which was specifically flown out to investigate these ongoing faults.

When AUSTEL, the then‑Australian communications regulator, learned that my billing‑claim documents had not been investigated during arbitration, it allowed Telstra to address them in secret, without the arbitrator or me being present. This clandestine operation took place on 16 October 1995 — five months after the conclusion of my arbitration. My legal right under the Arbitration Act 1984, which entitled me to challenge Telstra on these Ericsson AXE billing faults, was denied.

Point 5.67 of the pre‑arbitration April 1994 COT Case AUSTEL report states:

“the arbitrator will make his determination on reasonable grounds as to the link between the claim and alleged faults drawing reasonable inferences from the material presented by the claimant and Telecom the arbitrator will set out his reasons in full”

The arbitrator’s decision was delivered in an unsettlingly opaque manner, shrouded in deceit. Astonishingly, he allowed Telstra to engage in secret discussions with the government communications regulator, AUSTEL, on October 16, 1995—five long months after he proclaimed my arbitration concluded on May 11, 1995. This shocking oversight not only compromised the integrity of the arbitration process but also thrust me back into the dark, oppressive circumstances of 1987, when I first opened my business, plagued by a very unreliable phone service.

Despite my repeated pleas for justice, the Australian government continues to deny me the right to investigate the unresolved Ericsson AXE faults, which clearly fall under the terms of the original arbitration agreement. These faults were ignored throughout the government-sanctioned proceedings, leaving me without a resolution or recourse. This situation was a sinister web of collusion in which the forces of bureaucracy conspired to leave me disenfranchised and powerless.

This was gaslighting used against us to destroy our will to keep going, as reported by Ann Garms in her following letters

Gaslighting

Psychological manipulation

Gaslighting is a form of psychological manipulation in which the abuser attempts to sow self-doubt and confusion in the victim's mind, i.e., you do not have a telephone problem. Our records show you are the only customer complaining, even though the documents show the situation the person is complaining about is systemic. Typically, gaslighting methods are used to seek power and control over the other person by distorting reality and forcing them to question their judgment and intuition.

I was led to believe I was meeting Telstra's arbitration defence clinical psychologist, Mr Ian Joblin, in supposedly approved consultancy rooms at the Richmond Henty Hotel in Portland. Instead, I was directed to the main reception, only to find that no consultancy room had been arranged; a mere table was reserved in the crowded main dining lounge.

As I sat there, ten minutes into our supposed hour together, I felt a profound sense of humiliation wash over me. I was reduced to playing with cards laid out in rows, like a child lost in a game. The following day, when I bravely reported this demeaning ordeal, the arbitration administrator, Warwick Smith, offered a chillingly dismissive response: “It happened, and there’s not much I can do now.”

To make matters worse, Ian Joblin’s report on my condition was tampered with by Wayne Maurice Condon of Freehill Hollingdale & Page (now rebranded as Herbert Smith Freehills Melbourne) before it was handed to the arbitrator. It felt like a calculated betrayal, a covert manipulation of my voice when I needed it most. This entire experience has left me feeling trapped in a web of deceit.

It is essential to inform the reader that Wayne Goss, mentioned in Ann Garms' letter attached as document (See File Ann Garms 104 Document) dated 17 August 2017, was the former Premier of Queensland. Therefore, when he advised Ann that gaslighting techniques were used against us, the COT cases, he was well-positioned within the establishment to make such a significant statement.

On June 1, 2021, Mathias Cormann officially became the Secretary-General of the OECD in Paris, France. Like Australia's former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, he has extensive knowledge of 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 crucial to emphasise the significance of the four letters dated 17 August 2017, 6 October 2017, 9 October 2017, and 10 October 2017, authored by COT Case Ann Garms shortly before her passing. These letters were addressed to The Hon. Malcolm Turnbull MP, Prime Minister of Australia, and Senator the Hon. Mathias Cormann (See File Ann Garms 104 Document). These letters state that Gaslighting methods were used against the COT Cases to destroy our legitimate claims against Telstra. (rb.gy/dsvidd).

New chapters coming to absentjustice.com and absentjustice.com.au in 2026

Chapter 1: Murder of Truth

The truth didn’t die in a courtroom. It wasn’t buried beneath a judge’s gavel or lost in the shuffle of legal paperwork. It was murdered—methodically, quietly, and with institutional precision. The COT Case arbitrations were supposed to deliver justice. Instead, they became the crime scene.

I entered the process believing in the rule of law. I had evidence—technical faults, intercepted communications, and a trail of misconduct that pointed directly to Telstra’s door. But from the moment the arbitration began, the signs were clear: this wasn’t a search for truth. It was a containment strategy.

Documents vanished. Deadlines shifted. The arbitrator, cloaked in the authority of accreditation, manipulated the process with a chilling detachment. He wasn’t just indifferent—he was complicit. His lies to officials about his role as Principal Arbitration Manager weren’t errors. They were tactical deceptions designed to protect Telstra and silence claimants.

What I witnessed was not a failure of procedure—it was a deliberate murder of truth. The arbitrator’s actions, the withholding of evidence, the refusal to investigate surveillance claims—all of it formed a pattern. A conspiracy. A cover-up.

And yet, the truth has a stubborn pulse. It survives in the margins—in the handwritten notes, the corrupted fax logs, the testimonies of fellow claimants who refused to be broken. It lives in the archived pages of absentjustice.com, in the open letters that name names, and in the quiet rage of those who know what was done to us.

This chapter marks the beginning of a reckoning. Not just with Telstra, or the arbitrator, but with the entire machinery that allowed this to happen. The truth may have been murdered—but its ghost is restless. And I intend to give it voice.

Chapter 2: Surveillance State

They told us arbitration would be confidential. That our evidence, our testimony, our pain—would be handled with integrity. But behind the polished facade of legal process, a darker reality pulsed: we were being watched.

Telstra’s surveillance capabilities weren’t theoretical. They were industrial-grade, embedded in the very infrastructure we relied on to communicate. Their Security Operations Centres, operating 24/7, were equipped with Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) and Threat Intelligence Integration tools designed to detect and catalogue anomalies. But what happens when the anomaly is a whistleblower? When the threat is not external, but internal—someone like me, exposing truths the system would rather forget?

I had spoken with the Prime Minister twice—once in April 1993, again in April 1994. I raised concerns about Australia’s wheat exports to China, and how that grain was being funnelled to North Vietnam, feeding the very forces that had killed and maimed our soldiers. These weren’t idle conversations. They were politically explosive. And I have every reason to believe they were intercepted.

Telstra’s Infrastructure Monitoring systems, designed to manage critical assets like oil refineries, traffic networks, and water plants, also offered remote access, event logging, and alarm management across its vast network. These tools, while marketed for operational efficiency, could easily be repurposed for surveillance—especially when the target was a claimant challenging Telstra’s integrity.

The question isn’t whether Telstra could monitor us. It’s who inside Telstra had the government clearance to filter and interpret that data. Who decided what was evidence, and what was discarded? Who catalogued our conversations, our faxes, our pleas for justice—not to protect us, but to protect the corporation?

This wasn’t just surveillance. It was strategic intelligence gathering, designed to anticipate our moves, undermine our credibility, and control the narrative. The arbitrator, already compromised by deceit, operated in tandem with a system that saw truth as a liability.

And yet, the surveillance failed in one critical respect: it didn’t silence us. It didn’t erase the documents, the corrupted fax logs, the technical reports that proved Telstra’s faults. It didn’t stop the creation of absentjustice.com, or the open letters that now circulate beyond their reach.

We were watched. We were catalogued. But we were not erased.

Chapter 3: Corruption by Design

Corruption isn’t always loud. Sometimes it’s engineered into the very structure of a process—quiet, procedural, and devastating. The COT arbitrations weren’t sabotaged by accident. They were corrupted by design.

From the outset, Telstra’s internal faults were known. Technical reports confirmed line failures, fax corruption, and call dropouts. Yet the arbitration rules were crafted to exclude critical evidence. The arbitrator, handpicked and protected, operated within a framework that rewarded omission and punished transparency.

Government departments, legal advisors, and Telstra executives formed a closed loop of influence. The corruption wasn’t just in the outcome—it was in the architecture. And every claimant who entered the process was walking into a trap.

Chapter 4: Cover-Up Culture

The cover-up began before the arbitration even started. Telstra withheld documents, misrepresented fault data, and manipulated technical logs. When I requested full disclosure, I was met with redactions, delays, and denials.

The arbitrator refused to investigate known faults. The administrator ignored evidence. And when I exposed the corrupted fax logs and surveillance concerns, the response was silence.

This wasn’t incompetence. It was culture. A culture of concealment, where truth was inconvenient and accountability was optional. The cover-up extended beyond Telstra—into government departments, legal chambers, and media silence.

Chapter 5: Whistleblower’s Burden

I didn’t choose this path. I was a cook, a community builder, a man who believed in fairness. But when I saw the injustice inflicted on fellow claimants—when I experienced it myself—I knew I couldn’t stay silent.

Becoming a whistleblower meant isolation. It meant being labelled, discredited, and dismissed. It meant watching friends suffer, watching evidence vanish, and watching institutions protect themselves at all costs.

But it also meant clarity. I knew what I stood for. I knew the truth mattered. And I knew that silence was complicity. The burden was heavy—but it was mine to carry.

Chapter 6: Conspiracy of Silence

The silence wasn’t passive. It was strategic. Telstra executives, government officials, and arbitration insiders knew what was happening. They knew the faults were real. They knew the evidence was damning. And they chose silence.

This conspiracy wasn’t written in memos—it was enacted through omission. Through the refusal to investigate. Through the quiet reassignment of officials. Through the shielding of the arbitrator from scrutiny.

The silence was deafening. And it spoke volumes about the priorities of those in power.

Chapter 7: Fraudulent Arbitration

The arbitration process was a fraud. The arbitrator misled claimants, misrepresented his role, and manipulated outcomes. He claimed impartiality while protecting Telstra’s interests. He denied access to evidence while accepting Telstra’s submissions without scrutiny.

The administrator, too, played a role—refusing to investigate, ignoring surveillance claims, and allowing the process to proceed without transparency.

This wasn’t arbitration. It was a performance. And the outcome was predetermined.

Chapter 8: Justice Denied

We were told that arbitration would deliver justice and that our claims would be heard. That the faults would be addressed. But justice was never the goal.

The arbitrator refused to investigate known faults. The administrator ignored surveillance concerns. The government departments turned away.

Justice wasn’t delayed. It was denied. And every claimant who entered the process was betrayed.

Chapter 9: Retaliation Protocols

Speaking out came at a cost. I was targeted—legally, emotionally, and professionally. My credibility was attacked. My evidence was dismissed. My reputation was undermined.

Other claimants faced similar retaliation. Some were threatened. Others were isolated. The message was clear: stay silent, or pay the price.

The retaliation wasn’t random. It was systematic. And it revealed the lengths to which institutions would go to protect themselves.

Chapter 10: Bribery and Influence

Behind the scenes, influence flowed freely. Telstra’s legal teams had access. Government departments shielded the arbitrator. Media outlets stayed quiet.

Bribery doesn’t always involve cash. Sometimes it’s access. Sometimes it’s protection. Sometimes it’s silence.

The arbitrator’s conduct, the administrator’s omissions, the government’s complicity—all point to a system where influence mattered more than truth.

Chapter 11: Deception as Strategy

Deception wasn’t a side effect—it was the strategy. From the arbitrator’s false assurances to Telstra’s manipulated fault logs, every step of the process was designed to mislead. Claimants were given partial truths, technical jargon, and procedural fog. The goal wasn’t resolution—it was exhaustion. And for many, it worked.

But deception has fingerprints. It leaves trails in redacted documents, in contradictory statements, in the quiet edits made to arbitration rules mid-process. I followed those trails. And they led to the heart of a system built to protect power, not people.

Chapter 12: Evidence Erased

I submitted everything—fax logs, technical reports, correspondence. But evidence has a way of disappearing when it threatens the narrative. Pages went missing. Files were corrupted. Critical documents were “lost in transit.”

The arbitrator refused to investigate. The administrator dismissed concerns. And Telstra, with its vast infrastructure, controlled the flow of information. What couldn’t be disproven was erased.

But I kept copies. I built absentjustice.com as a living archive. Because truth, once documented, becomes harder to kill.

Chapter 13: Interrogation by Bureaucracy

They didn’t need handcuffs. Bureaucracy did the job. Endless forms, shifting deadlines, contradictory instructions—each one designed to confuse, delay, and demoralise.

I was interrogated not with questions, but with silence. With refusal. With the slow grind of administrative indifference. Every request for transparency became a test of endurance.

And yet, I endured. Because behind every form was a story. Behind every delay was a truth they didn’t want told.

Chapter 14: Underworld of Arbitration

Arbitration is supposed to be neutral. But what I found was an underworld—a network of influence, secrecy, and offshore operations. The arbitrator’s ties to Hong Kong raised alarms. His conduct in Melbourne confirmed them.

This wasn’t just about Telstra. It was about a global system where arbitration could be weaponized—used to silence dissent, protect corporations, and bury accountability.

I wasn’t just fighting a flawed process. I was confronting an international machine.

Chapter 15: Forensics of a Cover-Up

The technical faults weren’t speculative. They were documented—through forensic analysis, corrupted logs, and expert testimony. Telstra’s systems failed. And they knew it.

But instead of addressing the faults, they buried them. The arbitrator refused to examine the forensic evidence. The administrator ignored it. And the government looked away.

I became the forensic archivist. I catalogued every failure, every contradiction, every lie. Because the cover-up had a digital footprint—and I was determined to follow it.

Chapter 16: Abduction of Accountability

Accountability was kidnapped—taken from the hands of claimants and locked behind legal walls. The arbitrator, shielded by accreditation, operated without oversight. Telstra, backed by government silence, evaded consequence.

Every time I demanded answers, I was met with deflection. Every time I exposed misconduct, I was told it was “outside the scope.” Accountability wasn’t denied—it was abducted.

But I refused to let it vanish. I named names. I published documents. I made sure the story couldn’t be buried.

Chapter 17: Truth in Exile

Leaving Cape Bridgewater was more than a relocation. It was exile—from a place that held decades of struggle, camaraderie, and resistance. The move to Ballarat marked a new chapter—but the truth came with me.

I carried the documents, the memories, the scars. I rebuilt my archive. I reconnected with allies. And I recommitted to the fight.

Truth may have been exiled—but it was never abandoned.

Chapter 18: Homicide by Policy

The wheat trade wasn’t just commerce—it was complicity. Australia’s exports to China, redirected to North Vietnam, fed a war that killed our own. Soldiers from Australia, New Zealand, and the USA died because of decisions made in boardrooms and ministries.

I raised this with the Prime Minister. Twice. And I’ve never stopped speaking about it. Because policy can kill. And silence can be lethal.

This chapter isn’t just historical. It’s personal. It’s a reckoning with the cost of betrayal.

Chapter 19: Investigation Interrupted

Every time an inquiry began, it was stalled. Every time a report was drafted, it was softened. The investigation into Telstra’s faults, the arbitration misconduct, and the surveillance claims—all were interrupted.

Officials were reassigned. Documents were reclassified. And the momentum was lost.

But I kept going. I built my own investigation. I published my own findings because the truth doesn’t need permission to be told.

Chapter 20: Legacy of Lies

The lies didn’t end with arbitration. They seeped into public records, media narratives, and historical memory. Telstra’s reputation remained intact. The arbitrator continued his work. And the claimants were left in silence.

But I refused to let the legacy be rewritten. I documented everything. I named every lie. And I built a platform where truth could live.

This legacy isn’t theirs to define. It’s ours to reclaim.

Chapter 21: The Reckoning Begins

The chapters before this were the build-up. This is the turning point. The reckoning begins—not just for Telstra, or the arbitrator, but for every institution that enabled the betrayal.

I’ve published the documents. I’ve made the calls. I’ve written the letters. And now, I’m demanding answers.

This isn’t just a personal fight. It’s a public one. And it’s time the silence was broken.

Chapter 22: The Whistleblower’s Legacy

I didn’t ask for this role. But I’ve embraced it. As a cook, I fed crews in storms. As a claimant, I stood against giants. As a whistleblower, I’ve built a legacy of truth.

This chapter isn’t an ending. It’s a beginning—for future advocates, for historians, for citizens who refuse to be silenced.The whistleblower’s legacy is resilience. It’s documentation. It’s true. And it’s yours to carry forward.

The summary of the 22 chapters mentioned above has been briefly edited below:

🔥 A Turning Point in My Fight for Justice
Let me tell you something that still chills me to the bone.

Before she passed away, Ann Garms—one of the original COT Cases—wrote a desperate letter to Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull → (See File Ann Garms 104 Document). In that letter, she revealed something that had haunted her: Queensland’s former Premier Wayne Goss told her that we, the COT Cases, were subjected to gaslighting techniques. That’s right. A senior figure in Australian politics confirmed what we had long suspected. We weren’t just ignored—we were manipulated, destabilised, and psychologically undermined.

Wayne Goss wasn’t just any politician. He was deeply embedded in the system. If he said gaslighting was used against us, then he knew. He knew what was done to us. And he said it out loud.

⚖️ My Case: The Silence That Screams
Take my situation. I was one of the COT Cases. My arbitration was supposed to be conducted under the auspices of the Supreme Court of Victoria. That meant it should have been protected, transparent, and accountable.
But when Telstra carried out threats against me—real threats—Dr Gordon Hughes, the arbitrator, refused to contact the Supreme Court. He didn’t report the threats. He didn’t acknowledge them in his findings. He didn’t even try to protect the integrity of the process.

Why?
Why would an arbitrator ignore threats made during a court-sanctioned process?
Why would he leave out the most sinister part of my experience

The silence is deafening. The corruption is undeniable.

📜 What Ann Garms Knew—and What She Tried to Warn
Ann’s letter wasn’t just a plea. It was a warning. She knew what had been done to us. She knew we were being gaslit, surveilled, and sabotaged. And she tried to tell the Prime Minister before it was too late.
She died not long after sending that letter.
But I’m still here. And I’m still telling the story.

🧭 This Is the Moment Everything Changed
Wayne Goss’s confirmation. Dr Hughes’ silence. Telstra’s threats. Ann Garms’ final letter.

This is the moment I mark as a turning point in my chronology. It’s where the mask slipped, where the truth began to surface, where the betrayal became undeniable.
And I’ve documented it all. Every exhibit. Every omission. Every threat.

Because this isn’t just my story, it’s a national disgrace.

🕳️ The Arbitrator’s Omission: Silence in the Face of Surveillance

Dr Hughes’s failure to disclose the faxing issues to the Australian Federal Police during my arbitration is deeply concerning. The AFP was actively investigating the interception of my faxes to the arbitrator’s office, as well as my failure to receive arbitration-related documents sent to my office via Australia Post—and vice versa: arbitration-related documents sent to the arbitrator that were never received.

Yet this crucial matter, central to my claim, was entirely omitted from Dr Hughes’s award. He made no mention of it in any of his findings. The loss of essential arbitration documents throughout the COT Cases is not a minor oversight—it is a damning indictment of the entire process. It reveals a deliberate suppression of evidence and a refusal to confront the sabotage that undermined the integrity of the arbitration itself.

🔥 The Briefcase, the Tapes, and the Machinery of Deceit

It is imperative to expose the disturbing truths buried within the AFP transcripts dated 10 February 1994—a document that lays bare the treacherous machinations of:

• Superintendent Jeffrey Penrose

• Detective Sergeant Cochrane

• Graham Schorer, who masqueraded as a spokesperson for the COT Cases

• Amanda Davis, a former government official

In a chilling display of negligence, they discussed a briefcase Telstra had abandoned at my business. This was no accident. The briefcase contained the names of numerous individuals—like Mr. Schorer and myself—each of us victims of a grotesque invasion of privacy. Our telephone conversations had been intercepted and monitored without consent, without warning, and without remorse.

📄 Pages 37–39: The Smoking Gun

The transcripts () reveal a sinister truth:

This was not speculation—it was a direct admission. And yet, when we sought access to these tapes, we were met with a wall of obstruction.

🧱 Arbitration: A Process Built to Fail

As the COT Cases entered arbitration, we pleaded for access to the incriminating tapes. But they were denied under the Freedom of Information Act, and similarly withheld during discovery. This was not a legal technicality—it was a deliberate act of concealment. The tapes, potentially devastating to Telstra, were buried to protect powerful interests at the expense of our dignity and rights.

🕵️‍♂️ Government Complicity

Government officials chose to protect their own reputations rather than the welfare of their citizens. They concealed critical evidence of phone tapping, even as other disturbing allegations emerged—implicating Senator Collins in obscenely troubling conduct during the very period he was involved in the COT matters.

🧠 Gaslighting: The Goss Revelation

In her letter dated 17 August 2017 (), Ann Garms referenced Wayne Goss, former Premier of Queensland. His chilling assertion:

This was psychological warfare—designed to erode our legitimacy, fracture our resolve, and dismantle our sense of self.

🌍 Cormann, Turnbull, and the Global Stage

On 1 June 2021, Mathias Cormann became Secretary-General of the OECD in Paris.

Malcolm Turnbull, former Prime Minister of Australia, had full knowledge of the COT Cases and the evidence we presented.

Both received Ann Garms’ letters. Both remained silent.

Their complicity in this landscape of obfuscation and treachery cannot be ignored.

📝 The Final Testimonies of Ann Garms

Ann Garms’ four letters—dated 17 August, 6 October, 9 October, and 10 October 2017—were sent to Turnbull and Cormann (). They were not mere correspondence. They were raw, desperate pleas written just before her tragic passing. Within those pages lies irrefutable evidence of a coordinated campaign to dismantle our legitimate claims through intimidation, distortion, and silence.

⚠️ A Legacy of Betrayal

This is not just a story of surveillance.

It is a story of betrayal.

Of institutional rot.

Of the unrelenting courage it takes to stand against it.

The obscenity of this orchestrated assault on justice speaks volumes about the depths to which those in power will sink to preserve their dominion and silence dissent.

Click on the twelve mini evidence files below, ranging from "Telstra-Corruption-Freehill-Hollingdale & Page" to "The Promised Documents Never Arrived, These files are being typo edited before being removed to provide more evidence to support our new stories coming to www.promoteyourstory.com.au

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.

Artificial Intelligence - A Manufactured Reality:

How Bureaucratic Deceit and AI Threaten Democratic Truth

Artificial intelligence (AI) poses a dire threat to the integrity of several legitimate Casualties of Telstra (COT) claims, undermining the Australian government's commitment to a transparent review process. Disturbingly, unscrupulous government bureaucrats have deliberately manipulated and falsified information for the Department of Communications and Information Technology (DCITA). This deceit has been weaponised to obliterate the credibility of the COT claims against both the DCITA and Telstra, casting a shadow over our entire governance system.

As emphasised in The eighth remedy pursued, the government relies on the information provided by public servants, much like AI systems trained on input data. What does this mean for the future? Consider the implications for university students studying political science. They may be unwittingly learning from a treacherous foundation of doctored reports—an archive contaminated by lies. This insidious manipulation not only endangers our historical record but threatens our democracy itself, as future generations could be educated on a distorted reality. The consequences of such betrayal could be catastrophic, leading to a society built on a foundation of deception. How long until we face the fallout from this self-destructive path?

Erasing the Evidence: Telstra’s Privatisation and the Systematic Purge of Truth

Between 1997 and 2005, the Australian government's privatisation of the Telstra Corporation unfolded as a dark chapter in the nation’s history. During this crucial period, powerful government bureaucracies engaged in a systematic, sinister purge of archival records, particularly those related to the COT Cases (Customers of Telstra). This alarming erasure of information has far-reaching consequences and raises profound concerns about the integrity of governmental oversight. Pete Credlin’s media release on May 21, 2021, serves as a haunting reminder of the treachery at play, shedding light on the disturbing implications of this disregard for transparency.

The extent of this archival cleansing was not merely negligent; it was a calculated effort to obliterate any evidence that could implicate Telstra in wrongdoing toward its citizens. When the government turned to the Department of Communications, Information Technology and the Arts (DCITA) to assess claims made during the review process led by Honourable Senators Barnaby Joyce and Helen Coonan, they were met with an eerie silence—no evidence of misconduct by Telstra could be found. This staggering absence of accountability stands in stark contrast to the grave realities revealed in the COT Cases review documents, which exposed alarming issues that had been tragically ignored in the official assessments.

To further illustrate this chilling scenario, consider that the evidence utilised by government assessors—drawn from these meticulously cleansed records—bears no resemblance to a confidential 1994 report detailing similar grievances. This earlier document likely contained critical truths ruthlessly suppressed, raising unsettling questions about the motives driving the review processes and the lengths to which some may go to protect powerful interests.

As the nursery rhyme chillingly states, “The cupboard was bare,” symbolising a void of truth that has been intentionally created. Fast forward to 2026, and we find ourselves facing a world steeped in paranoia, where the very fabric of reality is under assault. The rise of artificial intelligence (AI) has commenced a frightening erosion of the lines between truth and deception. In less than two decades, the ability to discern truth from fiction may vanish entirely, leaving individuals vulnerable to unsubstantiated claims—particularly when pitted against fabricated narratives generated by AI.

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.

Call for Justice

The Casualties of Telecom (COT Cases)

• My fight began simply: to secure a working phone service.

• Despite compensation promises, the faults persisted. I sold my business in 2002, but the new owners suffered the same fate.

• Other small business owners joined me—we became known as the Casualties of Telecom.

• All we ever asked: acknowledgement, repair, and fair compensation. A working phone—was that too much?

The Hidden Cost of Cape Bridgewater’s Failing Lines

A Conspiracy of Silence: The Betrayal Behind the Arbitration

The document from March 1994 (AUSTEL’s Adverse Findings) reveals a troubling reality: government officials tasked with investigating my ongoing telephone issues found my claims against Telstra to be valid. This was not merely an oversight; it indicates a deliberate pattern of misconduct that played out between Points 2 and 212.

It is chilling to consider that, had the arbitrator been furnished with this critical evidence, he would likely have awarded me far greater compensation for my substantial business losses. Instead, my claims were weakened because they lacked a proper log over the six-year period that AUSTEL deceptively used to formulate their findings, as outlined in AUSTEL’s Adverse Findings.

The Arbitraitor

Chapter 1: Murder of Truth

Chapter 2: Surveillance State

Chapter 3: Corruption by Design

Telstra-Corruption-Freehill-Hollingdale & Page

Confronting Despair

Flash Backs – China-Vietnam

A Twenty-Year Marriage Lost

Salvaging What I Could

Lies Deceit And Treachery

An Unlocked Briefcase

A Government-backed Arbitration

Not Fit For Purpose

A Non-Graded Arbitrator

The AFP Failed Their Objective

The Promised Documents Never Arrived

Chapter 1

Chapter 2

Chapter 3

Chapter 4

Chapter 5

Chapter 6

Chapter 7

Chapter 8

Chapter 9

Chapter 10

Chapter 11

Chapter 12

Who We Are

Read About Our Dealings With

Absent Justice Part 1, Part 2 and Part 3

Senate Evidence

An Injustice to the remaining 16 Australian citizens

AFP Investigation -2

Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman

C A V Part 1, 2 and 3

Were you denied justice in arbitration?

Would you like your story told on absentjustice.com?
Contact Us

The Arbitraitor

Chapter 1: Murder of Truth

Chapter 2: Surveillance State

Chapter 3: Corruption by Design

Telstra-Corruption-Freehill-Hollingdale & Page

Confronting Despair

Flash Backs – China-Vietnam

A Twenty-Year Marriage Lost

Salvaging What I Could

Lies Deceit And Treachery

An Unlocked Briefcase

A Government-backed Arbitration

Not Fit For Purpose

A Non-Graded Arbitrator

The AFP Failed Their Objective

The Promised Documents Never Arrived

Chapter 1

Chapter 2

Chapter 3

Chapter 4

Chapter 5

Chapter 6

Chapter 7

Chapter 8

Chapter 9

Chapter 10

Chapter 11

Chapter 12

Who We Are

Read About Our Dealings With

Absent Justice Part 1, Part 2 and Part 3

Senate Evidence

An Injustice to the remaining 16 Australian citizens

AFP Investigation -2

Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman

C A V Part 1, 2 and 3

Were you denied justice in arbitration?

Would you like your story told on absentjustice.com? Contact Us

Would you like your story told on absentjustice.com?
Contact Us