PLEASE NOTE: 

This webpage is still being edited, with the idea that it could be used as a template for a proposed documentary.

Thank you. 

When Helen Handbury, Rupert Murdoch's sister, visited my holiday camp a second time after reading my manuscript at absentjustice.com, she promised to provide my evidence supporting this website to her brother Rupert. She believed he would be appalled by Telstra's disregard for justice. I hesitated to inform Helen that Rupert Murdoch knew about Telstra's unethical practices. These illegal activities cost every Australian citizen millions of dollars in lost revenue. This revenue should have rightfully gone to the government and its citizens. This information is well documented in SENATE Hansard; therefore, Rupert Murdoch would have been aware that through Telstra's unethical practices, News Corp and Foxtel were compensated by Telstra for not meeting their cable rollout commitment time. This is quoted from → SENATE official Hansard – Parliament of Australia

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

The salience of highlighting the $400 million compensation payout to Rupert Murdoch and Fox, consequent to Telstra's failure to meet their service delivery deadline, lies in the disparity in treatment between Rupert Murdoch and the COT Cases. Prior to the arbitration between the COT Group and Telstra in 1994, the government communications authority assured the COT Cases that Telstra would address all ongoing telephone issues as part of the arbitration process.

Furthermore, it was established that the assessor and arbitrator were precluded from delivering a final award until all pertinent ongoing telephone problems were rectified in the arbitration procedure.

Regrettably, none of the telephone malfunctions cited in the arbitration submission were remedied as per the agreed-upon protocol. Notably, the arbitrator solely made determinations on historical past telephone issues. Rupert Murdoch received preferential treatment because of his high profile, while the COT Cases, holding valid claims against Telstra, were not afforded equitable treatment.

An example of the corroded copper wire that the COT Cases and some 120,000 COT-type Australian citizens experienced after the COT Cases arbitrations 1.e.:> Worst of the worst: Photos of Australia’s copper network | Delimiter. In my case, I refer to problems that the new owners of my business were experiencing after they purchased my business in December 2001, six years after the conclusion of my arbitration Chapter 4 The New Owners Tell Their Story