​Why Does Anyone Believe the Port Arthur Massacre Was a Conspiracy?

This week marks 20th anniversary of the Port Arthur massacre, dredging up inevitable conspiracy theories which resolutely claim year-in, year-out that it's all a gigantic cover-up. This is entirely expected, as the narrative of every major tragedy in modern history has been accompanied by those who are convinced there has to be something more going on. But during a recent segment of Channel 10's The Project, Port Arthur's doubters were given a surprising amount of oxygen.

Filmmaker Paul Moder, best known for being torn to shreds during this week's news cycle, was challenged by the show's host Waleed Aly for referring to convicted shooter Martin Bryant as the "alleged" perpetrator of the massacre. Bryant, who pled guilty, is currently serving 35 life sentences in prison for mass shooting—the worst in Australia's history.

Given Moder hasn't started shooting his film, or even secured a director, it's surprising he should get a national platform such as The Project. (And perhaps focusing the nation's collective exasperation at conspiracy theories on Moder is a little unfair; we've not yet seen the film, and this feels like the type of disproportionate public shaming that Jon Ronson famously wrote about. But hey, Moder's probably happy with the publicity. Writing as someone who has inexplicably seen his 2003 film Razor Eaters, I suspect he'll need it.)

Moder did expand on his doubts regarding Bryant's trial on The Project, pointing out that there was no evidence presented: No fingerprints, no ballistics, nothing. But as Aly went on to explain to Moder, this was because Bryant had pled guilty and—like every other trial in which a defendant pleads guilty—there's no need for such evidence to be presented.

So why do so many people doubt the official story on Port Arthur?

Tracing the conspiracy theories back, it all seems to have stemmed from a book called Deadly Deception at Port Arthur, written by Joe Vialls, self-described as an "independent investigator with 30 years direct experience of international military and oil field operations." While Vialls passed away in 2005, his findings have been reprinted online, utilising state-of-the-art website building technology from 1998. The website that hosts the Deadly Deception warns:

Got that?

Vialls spins a compelling tale, which is a given. If he didn't, he'd have convinced nobody. But his arguments are mired in minutiae, and there's no theoretical smoking gun to be found. He points to discrepancies in times and locations, and picks at eyewitness statements.

The most intriguing part of Vialls' conspiracy is his claim of who actually committed the Port Arthur massacre and why.

The culprits, Vialls claims, were specialists comprised of retired members of American and Israeli special forces. Their motive? To force the government to enact gun legislation that would leave our citizens defenseless.

He cites the naming of Lee Harvey Oswald as the JFK assassin as irrefutable evidence that government-led conspiracies happen all the time. Vials' favourite rambling Oswald theory revolves around his belief that the story was planted too early, with planners failing to take into account the time difference in New Zealand, where The Christchurch Star alleged printed the story before Oswald had even been accused.

This is roundly implausible before you consider the explanation by the Star's then-chief reporter Bob Cotton. But Vialls considers this proof that Oswald "was deliberately set up as a patsy" in "absolute scientific terms."

Complicit in this cover-up is the "mainstream media"—an amorphous group of newspapers, magazine, television shows and journalists—who have somehow set aside their wildly differing agendas, viewpoints and competitiveness to agree on a hole-filled narrative to feed the public. Rest assured, we'll be complaining at the next meeting.

So, why are so many people so willing to believe conspiracy theories?

Conspiracy theories are very useful when reality is too hard to accept. The idea that one lone gunman can take down a large group of people, or even a US president, can be terrifying when you consider how many other madmen there must be in the world ready to deploy terror without warning. Or maybe you're worried that such an event could lead to policy that you dislike—in this case, widespread gun control—and you find holes in the official story because you want to find holes. But mostly, the world is a scary and random place, and believing in carefully-planned intent is a coping mechanism.

But there is also the fact that sometimes these beliefs do pan out. The case of the Central Park Five, or that of the West Memphis Three, prove that sometimes innocent people are falsely jailed. The US criminal justice system has been well-documented to be brimming with wrongful convictions, and the recent revelation that the FBI gave flawed testimony that resulted in numerous executions cannot help matters.

Although this illustrates why we can be drawn to conspiracy theories, these examples are all a world away from the Martin Bryant case. In this instance, the fact that the case never went to trial means that the evidence was never made public, and with the evidence sealed, it's very easy for those who are inclined to see conspiracies to see one here.

Vialls believes he knows why we're so keen to accept the single shooter narrative:

It's a compelling point, and the "CSI effect" has established that our expectations of what can be achieved in the real world are deeply influenced by what we see in popular culture. But unless Vialls believed that the vast majority of cases in which a single person shoots a lot of people are false, then he is painting very broad strokes with a very wavy hand.

What the media does like to perpetuate is the idea of vast networks operating under our very noses. The latest James Bond film Spectre was the ultimate example of this, showing that all the previous shadowy organisations depicted in these films were actually being controlled by another shadowy organisation. A mega-shadowy organisation! And of course they love showing this. It makes for great storytelling. We love watching puzzles, and we love believing that puzzles exist in the real world.

Unfortunately, the world is not filled with Spectres and Blofelds pulling strings from afar. Nor is it filled with Martin Bryants. The difference is that the Bryants actually exist.

Lee doesn't believe in conspiracy theories, but he does believe in Twitter.