Sunday, 7 September 2014

I like a lot of Australians watched as Liz Hayes grilled James Ashby and to a lesser extent Mal Brough who supposedly was acting as James Lawyer. I found the interview was reasonable but it left you with more questions than answers. Not because Liz Hayes failed to ask the right questions of Mr Ashby. More because she couldn't ask the questions of the absentees in this affair.

The two notable missing in action are Christopher Pyne and Wyatt Roy. Both were unavailable or not willing participants. Pyne is already on record denying involvement or knowledge. Mr Ashby's statements would suggest this may not be the case.

The young inexperienced Wyatt Roy is the key. He unlike the other major players in this saga is not used to media and public scrutiny.He is the one most likely to crack under the intense focus and blow this affair and its players apart. The truth will set you free Mr Roy.

The interview of Ashby left me thinking that James Ashby had more credibility than the other players. He had a notarized diary to support his version of events. He had texts that were sent to and from his phone supporting him. I just felt he was not hesitant or evasive. 

Mal Brough was as lawyers are evasive and not really responsive to the questions which I believe added to the credibility of Mr Ashby and his version of events.
23 million Australians deserve to hear from Wyatt Roy and Christopher Pyne. There appear to be some solid lies being told perhaps when they catch up with Roy he may elaborate.