Oh yes it can. By the traditional multiple data points that infest these cases.
From memory
1. The glass lens was provably not there in the original crime scene.
Irrelevant and does not speak to either guilt or innocence, but dirty cops.
2. The luminol footprint could not be contained within the dimensions of Davis's much longer foot.
The pig in charge was a moron - that is abundantly clear from his evidence and statements. Without having the actual footprint, anything else is speculation. The blood-soaked sock used in tests can not have been the same as the one used - there is no possible way of knowing how much blood was on it, so scientifically, replication is impossible. If the carpet still existed, those questions would be answerable.
Certainly works for a not guilty verdict, but does not speak to innocence.
3. The computer was proved to be turmed on a few minutes before David was clocked walking into the house.
Clocked by whom? There is no evidence to show the actual time David arrived home.
4. There was blood photographed on Robin Bain's hands.
Which, considering they were dead at the time, wouldn't have been too hard to contaminate.
Where were the signs of a life-and-death struggle with the 14 yo boy?
5. Robin had motive and opportunity. He had piles of unmarked student work in his caravan. He had essentially abandoned teaching. He was screwing his daughter, and she was about to bust him for it.
Oh yeah, highly verifiable. How convenient that she was "just about" to report it after 'years and years' of abuse.
To me, it's as much a position against Baino as Robin.
Baino had the opportunity without doubt, and maybe the thought of it all coming out was too much for him?
Also, why would Robin say that David was the only one who deserved to live? What was wrong with the 14 yo? Was he a sinner? Baino was a 23 yo working part time because he was a loser with no skills.
He has every reason to commit the murders. In a single bound, his family is gone from the world, he gets all the sympathy and help a bereaved young man could expect and starts his life anew.
Short of a dozen years in the slammer, that's exactly where he is right now.
6. There was blood inside the silencer. Possible only from a contact shot.
Which Robin somehow fired in a means guaranteed to look like a murder.
If you buy the idea that Robin meant to not kill David and was killing himself, the whole thing falls to bits, because if that was his well thought-out intent, he would have made 100% sure his own death was nothing else but suicide.
He washed his socks, but didn't think setting it up to look like a murder would be counter-productive?
The enormous difference between Lundy and Bain (other than Baino getting away with it) is that the evidence shows Lundy cannot be guilty.
No evidence at all exists which exonerates David Bain.
