Welcome 

Until the late 1990s, the Australian government wholly owned Australia’s telephone network and the communications carrier, Telecom (today privatised and called Telstra). Telecom held the monopoly on communications and let the network deteriorate into disrepair. When four small business owners had severe communication problems, they went into arbitration with Telstra. The arbitrations were a sham: the appointed arbitrator not only allowed Telstra to minimise the Casualties of Telstra (COT) members’ claims and losses, but the arbitrator also bowed down to Telstra and let the carrier run the arbitrations. Telstra committed serious crimes during the arbitrations, yet the Australian government and the Australian Federal Police have not held Telstra or the other entities involved in this deceit. 

Corruption poses an existential threat to prosperity, security, and democracy – for Australia and people worldwide. When officials steal from their citizens or oligarchs flout the rule of law, honest businesses cannot compete on a level playing field, poverty grows, the conflict between citizens deepens, and trust in government plummets. In recognition of this terrible threat, I have launched absentjustice.com as a testament showing corruption in the Australian government has existed, at least during and after the Vietnam War.

For a country like Australia to have traded with its enemies while its citizens are dying and being maimed because that trade partner, communist China, is supporting the war effort where Australia's citizens are being killed and maimed is the worst possible treacherous evil-doing by any country on this planet - Chapter 7- Vietnam - Vietcong.

Question 81 in the following AFP transcripts Australian Federal Police Investigation File No/1 of their second interview with me during my arbitration confirms the AFP had evidence that Telstra had bugged my telephone conversations. The AFP and arbitrator have been unable to force Telstra to apologize or make recompense for their violation of my private and business life.

Chapter 2 - Illicit screening

Bribery, corruption, misleading and deceptive conduct 

The fax imprint across the top of this letter is the same as the fax imprint described in the Scandrett & Associates report (Open Letter File No/12 and  File No/13), which states:

“We canvassed examples, which we are advised are a representative group, of this phenomena [sic]. “They show that

• the header strip of various faxes is being altered
• the header strip of various faxes was changed or semi overwritten.
• In all cases the replacement header type is the same.
• The sending parties all have a common interest and that is COT.
• Some faxes have originated from organisations such as the Commonwealth Ombudsman office.
• The modified type face of the header could not have been generated by the large number of machines canvassed, making it foreign to any of the sending services.”

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

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

My 3 February 1994 letter to Michael Lee, Minister for Communications Hacking-Julian Assange File No/27-A) and a subsequent letter from Fay Holthuyzen, assistant to the minister (Hacking-Julian Assange File No/27-B), to Telstra’s corporate secretary, show that I was concerned that my faxes were being illegally intercepted.

An internal government memo, dated 25 February 1994, confirms that the minister advised me that the Australian Federal Police (AFP) would investigate my illegal phone/fax interception allegations. (Hacking-Julian Assange File No/28, (AFP Evidence File No 4),

Regardless of the Hon Michael Lee, Minister for Communications in the 1994 Labor government advising me during my Fast Track Settlement Proposal (FTSP) signed on 23 November 1993, which became the Fast Track Arbitration Procedure signed on 21 April 1994 that my evidence of phone interception and fax hacking (the screening of my FTSP, and FTAP related claim documents would be investigated and stopped. Evidence 10-C in (Front Page Part One File No/14) shows that my faxes, even to the then Australian Federal Treasurer, The Hon Peter Costello, (while in government), were still being hacked (screened) as late as 2 November 1998, thirty months after the completion of my arbitration.

Prologue Evidence File 1-A to 1-C

"COT Case Strategy" 

This is the story of a group of ordinary small-business people fighting one of the country's largest, most dishonourable and untrustworthy companies who retained the legal services of 37 of Australia's most prominent legal firms at the time of those arbitrations.

The story shows that to fix the ongoing telephone problems that sent the group into arbitration, they first had to register their phone faults in writing with one of these 37 legal firms before Telstra could investigate and hopefully fix them. The arbitration claimants were unaware they would need these registered fault complaints as evidence to prove their case.

Unbeknown to the CoT claimants, once a registered phone fault had been handled by one of these legal firms (refer to), the legal firm would not return their fault data to that claimant because it was now classified as Legal Professional Privilege (LPP). Imagine the frustration of knowing you had provided the evidence supporting your case. Still, it was now being withheld from you under LPP, which prevented you from fully supporting your claim before the arbitrator.

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" (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. 

Evidence Files 

The following links and evidence files have been extracted from over 2,800 similar links and files appended to this website. Upon clicking on any of these links and numbered exhibits, it becomes unequivocally apparent that the COT arbitrations were plagued with pervasive corruption, deception, and misleading conduct, including the perversion of the course of justice. The evidence presented in these links indicates a systemic and deliberate effort to subvert the arbitration process and undermine the integrity of justice.

Numbered Exhibits

The following exhibit numbers are the various evidence exhibits used in Chapters 1 to 12  of Absent Justice - Documentary.

Example 1:  File AS 942 = AS-CAV 923 to 946 

Example 2 : File 34-C = AS-CAV Exhibit 1 to 47

AS-CAV Exhibit 1 to 47 – AS-CAV Exhibit 48-A to 91 – AS-CAV Exhibit 92 to 127 – AS-CAV Exhibit 128 to 180 – AS-CAV Exhibit 181 to 233 – AS CAV Exhibit 234 to 281 – AS-CAV Exhibit 282 to 323 – AS-CAV Exhibit 324-a to 420 AS-CAV Exhibit 421 to 469 – AS-CAV Exhibit 470 to 486 – AS-CAV Exhibit 488-a to 494-e –AS-CAV Exhibits 495 to 541 – AS-CAV Exhibits 542-a to 588 – AS-CAV Exhibits 589 to 647 – AS-CAV Exhibits 648-a to 700 – AS-CAV Exhibit 765-A to 789 AS-CAV Exhibit 790 to 818 – AS-CAV Exhibit 819 to 843 – AS-CAV 923 to 946 – AS-CAV Exhibit 1150 to 1169 – AS-CAV 1103 to 1132 – AS-CAV Exhibit 1002 to 1019 – AS-CAV Exhibit 996 to 1001 – GS-CAV Exhibit 1 to 88 GS-CAV Exhibit 89 to 154-b – GS-CAV Exhibit 155 to 215 – GS-CAV Exhibit 216 to 257 – GS-CAV Exhibit 258 to 323 – GS-CAV Exhibit 410-a to 447 – GS-CAV Exhibit 448 to 458 – GS-CAV Exhibit 459 to 489 – GS-CAV Exhibit 490 to 521 GS-CAV 522 to 580 – GS-CAV Exhibit 581 to 609

---

Tampering with Evidence

Tampering With Evidence File No 1-A to 1-C   Tampering With Evidence File No 2   Tampering With Evidence File No 3  Tampering With Evidence File No 4  Tampering With Evidence File No 5  Tampering With Evidence File No 6  Tampering With Evidence File No 7  Tampering With Evidence File No 8-A to 8-C  Tampering With Evidence File No 9  Tampering With Evidence File No/10   Tampering With Evidence File 11-A to 11-B   Tampering With Evidence File No/12-A to 12-E   Tampering With Evidence File No 13  Tampering With Evidence File No 14  AXE Faulty Equipment