Should David Bain get compensation?

[Roger Ramjets]

That's kind of what actually happens, isn't it?

I think - or at least hope - that these situations are rare. The majority of murders involve criminals who have a history of violence and are almost certainly guilty. The police are well familiar with this type and know how to deal with them.

It is when such a crime involves 'ordinary' people that the police tend to go astray. Assuming that the suspects are lying - but can be broken with enough pressure. Overestimating the significance of innocent actions and random coincidences. Going with gut feelings rather than dispassionately weighing up the evidence. In a normal investigation these techniques work because the suspects usually are lying, behavior patterns often are significant, and gut feelings are often correct. But when tackling an unusual crime they are already outside the norm, so assuming that the usual probabilities apply doesn't work.

The David Bain case appeared to be a simple murder/suicide. But some things didn't 'add up' (gut feelings), and the police don't like a crime with no criminal to convict. So they latched onto the sole survivor, assumed he was guilty, and tried to unmask him. Perhaps he really did it and they were going down the right track, but the evidence they got wasn't sufficient to prove it. Had they not been so sure, they might have collected more reliable evidence - and then there wouldn't be any doubt about his guilt.

 

[Rolfe]

If we're talking about people who have been released on appeal who were guilty all along, yes I do think that's rare. It's very much more difficult to win an appeal than it is to avoid being convicted in the first place, such is the prejudice against the person who has been convicted.

I believe the vast majority of people who are acquitted on appeal are genuinely innocent. However as things stand only a very few are lucky enough to get compensation. If they have been acquitted because new evidence proves they didn't do it, fine. (Though even then the authorities will deduct bed and board from the award, which is unconscionable in my opinion.) However people acquitted simply because the appeal court recognised that the original evidence should never have resulted in a conviction in the first place are generally screwed.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

I think - or at least hope - that these situations are rare. The majority of murders involve criminals who have a history of violence and are almost certainly guilty. The police are well familiar with this type and know how to deal with them.

It is when such a crime involves 'ordinary' people that the police tend to go astray. Assuming that the suspects are lying - but can be broken with enough pressure. Overestimating the significance of innocent actions and random coincidences. Going with gut feelings rather than dispassionately weighing up the evidence. In a normal investigation these techniques work because the suspects usually are lying, behavior patterns often are significant, and gut feelings are often correct. But when tackling an unusual crime they are already outside the norm, so assuming that the usual probabilities apply doesn't work.

The David Bain case appeared to be a simple murder/suicide. But some things didn't 'add up' (gut feelings), and the police don't like a crime with no criminal to convict. So they latched onto the sole survivor, assumed he was guilty, and tried to unmask him. Perhaps he really did it and they were going down the right track, but the evidence they got wasn't sufficient to prove it. Had they not been so sure, they might have collected more reliable evidence - and then there wouldn't be any doubt about his guilt.

After years of following murder cases, the crime scene in this case looks like a murder/suicide. David Bain would have had to get up, kill everyone but his father, then go out to deliver papers, and come back to kill his father later. Does not compute. So I don't think he did it, and certainly the proof of guilt does not exist. It only exists if one accepts conjecture and inference as proof.

At the same time, I have always realized that the proof of innocence is forever out of reach.

As for hoping these situations are rare, well, murder itself is rare. I won't get murdered today, and neither will you. Sure, it happens, it could happen, but realistically, it's not a risk most of us have to think about.

Within the context of murder, however, wrongful conviction is not rare at all...

 

[smartcooky]

The case will go to an international jurist, who will declare Lundy could not have done what the crown alleges, therefore a prima facie case for compensation is proved.

Yep, but they did that with David Bain. Canadian Justice Binnie's report in favour of compensation was rejected by the NZ Government, and they commissioned Justice Fisher to report on Justice Binnie's report.

After some too-ing and fro-ing in the midst of Justice Minister Judith Collins' fall from grace, Amy Adams took over and endorsed Judith Collins' view, set both reports aside and started again, commissioning yet another report.

Justice Binnie, has said the he is not happy with Adams' criticisms of his report. He argues that he had 'weighed up the totality of the evidence both for and against Mr Bain.' He said the Government was clearly 'shopping around' for a report that will allow it to dodge paying compensation.

IMO, they will keep Judge shopping until they get what they want.

 

[GT/CS]

Nightowl is probably a Fox News fan

 

[Samson]

We can solve this case.
There must be a locking piece that precludes one or other culprit.
Blood evidence inculpates David and excludes Robin. The computer evidence means Robin Bain had an impossible window of opportunity to type a cryptic message, and shoot himself as David returned from his paper round. That reminds me of thing one and thing two tidying the house just in time.
But Joe Karam claims to have covered all these bases. The cartridge case print on Robin's thumb supports murder suicide.

These alternate theories are irreconcileable, and there is a public opinion split 50/50. This is the worst indicator by far. The truth is discernable by better methodology.

There is no reason to abandon the detailed search for truth. If Joe Karam has explained the impossible time line and blood evidence, then the cartridge thumb print is compelling, as is motive, but opportunity is shot to pieces.

 

[The Atheist]

We can solve this case.

Sure: David Bain did it.

Piece of cake.

But Joe Karam claims to have covered all these bases. The cartridge case print on Robin's thumb supports murder suicide.

Nope. No way.

The mark on Robin's thumb has nothing to do with cartridge cases. I explained why that is rubbish.

There is no reason to abandon the detailed search for truth. If Joe Karam has explained the impossible time line and blood evidence, then the cartridge thumb print is compelling, as is motive, but opportunity is shot to pieces.

Let's get this right.

Karam has suggested a set of possibilities that could allow Robin to be guilty, except that they contain assumptions and speculation - much in the way that I speculated C & A Lundy could have had a midnight snack. You can explain anything away if you try hard enough, but Karam's theories do not stack up.

Facts show that Robin cannot be guilty, which only leaves dear David. I have yet to see any evidence that exonerates him, although I accept that the useless bag of crap cops investigating managed to screw up the easiest bust in history.

Which is probably exactly why they screwed it up.

Hire monkeys: expect low standards.

The jury bought a not guilty possibility by Baino's lawyers cleverly playing the sympathy card: "Hmmm, whom shall we convict? The nice young man sitting with Mr Karam, or the deviant old scumbag who was screwing his own daughter/s?"

Tough one, that.

 

[cullennz]

I thought Bain's case was fairly simple. He just has to prove he didn't do it

 

[Samson]

Sure: David Bain did it.

Piece of cake.



Nope. No way.

The mark on Robin's thumb has nothing to do with cartridge cases. I explained why that is rubbish.



Let's get this right.

Karam has suggested a set of possibilities that could allow Robin to be guilty, except that they contain assumptions and speculation - much in the way that I speculated C & A Lundy could have had a midnight snack. You can explain anything away if you try hard enough, but Karam's theories do not stack up.

Facts show that Robin cannot be guilty, which only leaves dear David. I have yet to see any evidence that exonerates him, although I accept that the useless bag of crap cops investigating managed to screw up the easiest bust in history.

Which is probably exactly why they screwed it up.

Hire monkeys: expect low standards.

The jury bought a not guilty possibility by Baino's lawyers cleverly playing the sympathy card: "Hmmm, whom shall we convict? The nice young man sitting with Mr Karam, or the deviant old scumbag who was screwing his own daughter/s?"

Tough one, that.

Yes, you loaded thousands of cartridges.
How come, you are a greenie.
Next you will be saying you have a driver's licence.

Anyway, I am looking for Joe's books.
The blood evidence and the pristine Robin is problematic. Yet it is a crime noone could expect to get away with, yet a dead man doesn't care and that speaks volumes.
What fool thinks he can kill his family and not be a suspect? What fool does that and spends years in reverse gear? Maybe old Judge Binnie ain't so dumb. LashL sure thinks not.
Judge Pankhurst, what did he think? He dabbled in Pike River

 

[cullennz]

The fact is emotionally Karam can't afford to be wrong so his opinion should be looked at from a biased point of view.

Bain just needs to prove he didn't do it

 

[Samson]

The fact is emotionally Karam can't afford to be wrong so his opinion should be looked at from a biased point of view.

Bain just needs to prove he didn't do it

Do you think he did it?

 

[cullennz]

Yes

But I am happy for him to come out and say what happened to change my mind

 

[smartcooky]

Do you think he did it?

I think its possible that his father killed the rest of the family, and that David killed his father then staged it to look like suicide.

1. While both David and Robin had the means and the opportunity to do the killing, Robin had more of a motive.

2. Would explain the magazine marks on Robin's hand and overcome the problematic suicide. i.e the difficulties regarding the position of the rifle.

3. Would explain why trace evidence from David was found on the bodies (he discovered them when he got home) and why his bloody fingerprint was found on the rifle.

Is there anything in the evidence which would preclude this theory?

 

[The Atheist]

Yes, you loaded thousands of cartridges.
How come, you are a greenie.
Next you will be saying you have a driver's licence.

I am not a "greenie", thanks.

The friend of my friend is not necessarily my friend.

It's not just the loading of cartridges, it's Robin's hands.

I imagine I've shaken hands with and sat down and talked to a hell of a lot more people than many ever manage, since it's been my job for about 30 years, and you learn a lot about hands and who owns them.

Robin's hands were clearly worn and filthy. The marks on his hands are entirely consistent with his lifestyle and there are other marks visible that are identical.

In terms of the marks being left by cartridges, that is pure fantasy. They don't match any magazine, they don't match a .22 profile, and they're not made by loading a rifle.

Anyway, why would he gets black marks from them? Guns don't normally get left around dirty, because even the dumbest gun owner knows dirt will kill you. Gun oil isn't black and cartridges are brass.

The whole thumb scenario is idiotic. Betcha the jury were all townies.

Oh, and the reason I know about guns and have loaded lots of them is because I believe it's possible to be pro-environment and shoot, because everything I shoot is an introduced noxious species.

Some of them taste bloody good, though.

I think its possible that his father killed the rest of the family, and that David killed his father then staged it to look like suicide.

Sure it's possible, but only in the way that Bertie Russell's teapot orbiting Venus is possible.

1. While both David and Robin had the means and the opportunity to do the killing, Robin had more of a motive.

Did he?

What percentage of incestual abusers kill their family?

2. Would explain the magazine marks on Robin's hand and overcome the problematic suicide. i.e the difficulties regarding the position of the rifle.

I'd use "impossibility" rather than "difficulty".

Baino should send the cops a Christmas card every year to thank them for their sloppy attention to detail and evidence.

Is there anything in the evidence which would preclude this theory?

Not that I'm aware of, although there's nothing in the evidence that exonerates Bigfoot or the Abominable Snowman, either, so the field's wide open.

 

[smartcooky]

In terms of the marks being left by cartridges, that is pure fantasy. They don't match any magazine, they don't match a .22 profile, and they're not made by loading a rifle.

Anyway, why would he gets black marks from them? Guns don't normally get left around dirty, because even the dumbest gun owner knows dirt will kill you. Gun oil isn't black and cartridges are brass.

I get similar marks on my thumb when I load cartridges into the magazine on both my Remington 700 .270 and my Savage M12 .243 Win. The marks are smears of gunshot residue from the top of the the magazine. I usually get them when loading the magazine after the first time I have shot the rifle after cleaning. The marks are a little further apart (because of the calibre) and at a slightly different angle, and they don't always look exactly the same each time. I have slight arthritis in both hands so I have to use my thumbs at a different angles sometimes to get the cartridges to slide backwards; sometimes I push them backwards from the bullet end with my right hand, sometimes I pull them backwards from the primer end with my left hand.

I do not think it is beyond reason that these marks were made the same way. The fact that they were visible in the crime scene photos but are not mentioned at all by the pathologist and AFAIK do not appear in any of his photos taken in the lab would tend to indicate that they were not permanent (GSR rubs off easily), so not scratches or scars of any kind.

Did he?

What percentage of incestual abusers kill their family?

That isn't the right question to ask.

The right question is "What percentage of incestual abusers whose perversions are about to be revealed by a family member and become public knowledge kill their family?

People kill their families for a whole lot of reasons, often known only to themselves. Robin Bain had a very strong reputation to protect in the local community. He was the Principal at Taieri Beach School where he was very involved in the Drama Department. When Laniet Bain made her father's incestuous relationship with her public, his reputation would lay in ruins. That's motive IMO.

 

[Samson]

I get similar marks on my thumb when I load cartridges into the magazine on both my Remington 700 .270 and my Savage M12 .243 Win. The marks are smears of gunshot residue from the top of the the magazine. I usually get them when loading the magazine after the first time I have shot the rifle after cleaning. The marks are a little further apart (because of the calibre) and at a slightly different angle, and they don't always look exactly the same each time. I have slight arthritis in both hands so I have to use my thumbs at a different angles sometimes to get the cartridges to slide backwards; sometimes I push them backwards from the bullet end with my right hand, sometimes I pull them backwards from the primer end with my left hand.

I do not think it is beyond reason that these marks were made the same way. The fact that they were visible in the crime scene photos but are not mentioned at all by the pathologist and AFAIK do not appear in any of his photos taken in the lab would tend to indicate that they were not permanent (GSR rubs off easily), so not scratches or scars of any kind.



That isn't the right question to ask.

The right question is "What percentage of incestual abusers whose perversions are about to be revealed by a family member and become public knowledge kill their family?

People kill their families for a whole lot of reasons, often known only to themselves. Robin Bain had a very strong reputation to protect in the local community. He was the Principal at Taieri Beach School where he was very involved in the Drama Department. When Laniet Bain made her father's incestuous relationship with her public, his reputation would lay in ruins. That's motive IMO.

Better motive than no motive for sure.
However the timeline problem, computer on 2 minutes before David walks in, leaves little time for suicide. That is what Joe must have analysed.

 

[smartcooky]

Better motive than no motive for sure.
However the timeline problem, computer on 2 minutes before David walks in, leaves little time for suicide. That is what Joe must have analysed.

But plenty of time for David to have shot his father after he came home and found his brother, sisters and mother dead, and his father with a rifle in his hands.

 

[The Atheist]

The marks are smears of gunshot residue from the top of the the magazine.

A smear, I'd buy. Robin's finger is clearly just a mark, and it's not something that would be mentioned on the most in-depth coroner's report, because it's a natural state for a dirty old guy's hand. On the other hand, if it was a smear, the coroner probably would have noticed and commented.

 

[Samson]

But plenty of time for David to have shot his father after he came home and found his brother, sisters and mother dead, and his father with a rifle in his hands.

Murder murder. hmm. Complicated but not impossible.
I just got Joe's book from the library Trial by Ambush, and so far it looks good for David. The crown evidence gives a most likely power on for the computer at 6 42 30 am, and Bain was seen at the gate at 6 45, so he could not have turned it on. Therefore he is innocent.

A very brief perusal shows all the usual idiocy by police and prosecution. Joe's detailed analysis is formidable, and answers every objection as is the way with a wrongful prosecution. Another one for the list, and another crushing blow coming for crusher Collins.

 

[The Atheist]

...and another crushing blow coming for crusher Collins.

She's quite capable of hoisting her own petard, that woman.

Bonkers.