Price Waterhouse Coopers 1

 

An Absent Justice documentary is being considered. Anyone interested in funding such a project can express their interest via our website - Contact - Government Corruption.

 

A Telstra minute, dated 2 July 1992, concerning the Portland Ericsson AXE telephone exchange states:

“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.”  (False Witness Statement File No 3-A)

To further support my claims that Telstra already knew my phone complaints were valid, can best be viewed reading Folios C04006, C04007 and C04008, headed TELECOM SECRET (see Front Page Part Two 2-B) states:

“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.”

It is clear from much of the information supplied by David Hawker, MP, to me in 1993 and 1994 that many people as far away as Penshurst, Apsley, Hamilton, Timboon, Victoria Valley and through Portland were complaining to him about the phone problems in his electorate. The Hon. Mr Hawker MP was passing on many of those complaints to me for the COT cases to take to Parliament House, Canberra, in our pursuit to have the Senate investigate why so many rural south-west citizens were experiencing the same problems as my business (see Introduction File No/11-E).

A letter dated 6 April 1993, from Cathy Lindsey, Coordinator of the Haddon & District Community House Ballarat (Victoria) to the Editor of Melbourne’s Herald-Sun, read:

“I am writing in reference to your article in last Friday’s Herald-Sun (2nd April 1993) about phone difficulties experienced by businesses.

I wish to confirm that I have had problems trying to contact Cape Bridgewater Holiday Camp over the past 2 years.

I also experienced problems while trying to organise our family camp for September this year. On numerous occasions I have rung from both this business number 053 424 675 and also my home number and received no response – a dead line.

I rang around the end of February (1993) and twice was subjected to a piercing noise similar to a fax. I reported this incident to Telstra who got the same noise when testing.”

(Because of a number of reports regarding this ‘piercing noise’, Ray Morris from Telstra’s Country Division arranged to have my service switched to another system.” (My Story Evidence File 10-B)

The pressure on all four COT cases was immense, with TV and newspaper interviews and our continuing canvassing of the Senate. The stress was telling by now, but I continued to hammer for a change in rural telephone services. The Hon David Hawker MP, my local Federal member of parliament, had been corresponding with me since 26 July 1993.

“A number of people seem to be experiencing some or all of the problems which you have outlined to me. …

“I trust that your meeting tomorrow with Senators Alston and Boswell is a profitable one.”(See Arbitrator File No/76)

On 18 August 1993, The Hon. David Hawker MP again wrote to me, noting:

“Further to your conversations with my electorate staff last week and today I am enclosing a copy of the correspondence I have received from Mr Harvey Parker, Group Managing Director of Commercial and Consumer division of Telecom.

“I wrote to him outlining the problems of a number of Telecom customers in the Western Districts, including the extensive problems you have been experiencing.” (Arbitrator File No/77 and Arbitrator File No/82)

My concise three-minute YouTube video below makes this clear. At eighty years old, I'm tackling the injustices endured by the COT Cases during their arbitrations. The Australian government's tacit acceptance of unresolved issues in sanctioned arbitrations would likely be unacceptable in most Western democracies. The video also exposes corruption in government when they allowed Telstra's lawyers Freehill Hollingdale & Page to target four Australians and their four named businesses so that when these four citizens signed their government-endorsed arbitration, the documents the government promised them would be provided to assist them in preparing their claims were firmly hidden using the Freehill Hollingdale & Page COT Case Strategy.

Ann's Garms was prepared to go live on her YouTube video below about her arbitration and appeal process, which coincides with her letters discussed throughout this website.

Delloits were Telstra's arbitration financial accountants in Ann's and my arbitration, where our accountants strongly refuted many of Deloitt's' arbitration findings. While I am not saying Deloitt's acted unlawfully during my arbitration, what was most concerning was the statement made by one of their witnesses under another concerning my ongoing telephone problems because that statement: there was nothing wrong with my telephones which he and his company had tested, does not match AUSTEL’s Adverse Findings, at points 2 to 212, regarding my business losses. 

Most importantly, Telstra funded all three auditing companies that participated in our government-endorsed arbitration instead of the government, which endorsed the arbitrations. How can the government endorse a process that allows only the arbitration defendants to test the equipment under investigation but does not ensure that the arbitration technical consultants do similar testing of the same service under investigation?  

I want to emphasize that despite the poor quality of the YouTube video, it does not negate the fact that at least three of the nine business people shown in the video have since passed away. These individuals did not receive the justice I am requesting the current government to provide by reviewing each case on its merit, including my case. The government should visit absentjustice.com and read the rest of my statements to determine if the remaining COT Cases have valid claims against the Commonwealth.

It's now June 2024, and every time I work on finalizing parts of our website and documentary, I must revisit the complex details of our authentic, terrible story. My anxiety levels instantly begin to rise. I also struggle to find the right words to conclude this dreadful tale. It's challenging to adequately explain the disaster we've all grappled with for many years. One major issue is that none of the COT cases - all honest Australian citizens - should have been forced into a situation that led us to deal with numerous unaddressed crimes. These crimes were committed against us while we were part of a government-endorsed arbitration process. There are two parts to this problem for the COTs. First, those identified below collaborated with Telstra to commit these unaddressed crimes. Then there's Telstra, an organization with the power to prevent any authorities, including government authorities, from investigating these crimes, as Chapter Nine of the Sunday Business Programme and our website story "Absent Justice" clearly shows.

It's important to emphasize that every detail on this website is accurate and backed by irrefutable evidence readily available directly from the website. Additionally, after discussing with other members of the COT group, we decided that considering the stress we're all still experiencing, it would be better to release our stories to the public exactly as they are on the website now, even if it's not how we originally intended to present them when we started putting the website together.

Absentjustice.com is the website that triggered a deeper investigation into criminal conduct in government. Narcism, unconscionable <