David Bain
-
<p>Compo is (and should be) for wrongful conviction i.e. when errors are made and facts distorted to get a conviction that the legal system hasn't been able to protect the accused from.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>In this case errors were made and there was an element of 'tunnel vision'. There was evidence withheld which 'may' have led a jury to a different conclusion (as it eventually did).</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Once convicted though, our compo system will only pay out if you can prove innocence (quite a hard thing to do in some cases) rather than prove that you shouldn't have been convicted (because guilt is not beyond reasonable doubt). The goalposts move after the wrongful part has happened. </p>
<p> </p>
<p>I don't think that is a fair and even system myself however in this case I have both doubts on conviction AND doubts on innocence, which I believe is the very position the govt is in.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>On the happenings themselves I strongly suspect that Bain has convinced himself he did nothing (and may have even convinced himself very early on). There is some psych term for it that I can't remember but it is to do with extreme stress. I don't think the crown version of events is entirely correct either and that Robin played a part. The whole thing looks way more complicated an event than either party attests to.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="MN5" data-cid="602410" data-time="1470120437">
<div>
<p>I'm getting that you don't seem to think much of him but I've heard he's spent a fucken fortune on all of this without getting a hell of a lot in return ?</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Heard from who? Hes written three books about the clown and him and his son have made $1.2 mill according to the link I posted. </p> -
This is my favourite article on the matter. I'm on my phone so don't know how to paste the article into the post, but it's a good read - intriguing questions at the end as well. <br><br>
<a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://i.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/opinion/8075826/Compensation-for-Bain-would-be-a-travesty'>http://i.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/opinion/8075826/Compensation-for-Bain-would-be-a-travesty</a> -
I used to sit next to him in psychology tutorials at Otago uni - you never forget those jerseys.<br><br>
I don't know if he did it.<br><br>
But there's something awry in our country when you lose 13 years and don't get compo. I can feel empathy for that. It's the sort of shit I'd expect from a corrupt 3rd world place.<br><br>
Yes I understand that rules are followed but I expect better. -
<p>Apparently they are going to look at the requirements to get compo, as it currently stands, he does not meet the threshold.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I do agree somewhat that given he spent that time in prison, you could argue wrongfully, then they should be looking at it.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The Crown was unable to prove him guilty (again) so he is out of prison, but by the same token he hasnt been able to prove his innocence, so therefore is not innocent, but also not guilty.... :think:</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="jegga" data-cid="602415" data-time="1470120909">
<div>
<p>Heard from who? Hes written three books about the clown and him and his son have made $1.2 mill according to the link I posted. </p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Well a quick read of Wikipedia confirmed that he has lost in the region of 4 mill and it's actually 4 books ( Christ, isn't one enough ? )</p>
<p> </p>
<p>That link from AW is pretty damning on Bain, no two ways about it.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>While we're on the topic can someone explain how Mark Lundy ( 500 ) got a retrial which ended in EXACTLY the same verdict ?</p> -
<p>So if I understand this correctly it was either him killing everyone under the roof, or his father decided to let one of them do a paper run but kill everyone else including himself?</p>
-
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="antipodean" data-cid="602437" data-time="1470122921">
<div>
<p>So if I understand this correctly it was either him killing everyone under the roof, or his father decided to let one of them do a paper run but kill everyone else including himself?</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>I know that technology has moved on since 1994 but ( aucklandwarlord, Crazy Horse if you're around ) wouldn't a forensics team be able to tell if a gunshot wound to the head was suicide or not ?</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="MN5" data-cid="602432" data-time="1470122570"><p>
While we're on the topic can someone explain how Mark Lundy ( 500 ) got a retrial which ended in EXACTLY the same verdict ?</p></blockquote>
<br>
The Lundy one is a bit different because they had relied on scientific evidence around stomach content decomposition that 'definitively' placed the time of the murders early in the evening (based on how broken down the McDonald's in Christine lundys stomach was). However, in the years following, it transpired that the science was flawed and that time of death could have been far later in the evening so a retrial was ordered. <br><br>
The crown re-examined its case in light of the new evidence and decided that it was far more likely that Lundy made the trip at night (thus rendering the Lundy five hundy part of the trial more or less irrelevant) and killed them before casually driving back to Wellington to check out of his hotel. -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="antipodean" data-cid="602437" data-time="1470122921">
<div>
<p>So if I understand this correctly it was either him killing everyone under the roof, or his father decided to let one of them do a paper run but kill everyone else including himself?</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Or it was someone else, Professor Plum maybe?</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I think they said it was possible for him to shoot himself with the rifle used in the killings.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="MN5" data-cid="602439" data-time="1470123084"><p>
I know that technology has moved on since 1994 but ( aucklandwarlord, Crazy Horse if you're around ) wouldn't a forensics team be able to tell if a gunshot wound to the head was suicide or not ?</p></blockquote> <br><br>
The best way to tell would have been gunshot residue swabs to David and Robin Bains hands. That would tell who pulled the trigger. <br><br>
Rumour around the office a few years back had it that a junior detective constable suggested swabbing David's hands and was shouted down by a more senior member. For the life of me I don't know why it didn't happen at Robin Bain's post mortem. It would be standard practice these days -
I'm one of the (few!?) people who haven't made my mind up firmly either way. <br><br>
Whichever side I'm hearing from always seems compelling until I hear the other... And I haven't been that interested in the case to read every last detail to conclude which trumps which. Aucklandwarlord's link is damning, but then so was the interview I heard with Justice Binny tonight too ('how can he completely prove his innocence when the police destroyed some evidence earlier than they were supposed to' - to paraphrase.)<br><br>
On compensation, goodness knows how you put a price on that sort of thing... But on the surface of it, if you've spent 13 years in prison and then been found not guilty after the Privy Council intervened, then I find it hard to argue $0. If the $900k covers the bills and then some, then maybe that does the trick... -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="aucklandwarlord" data-cid="602442" data-time="1470123347"><p>The best way to tell would have been gunshot residue swabs to David and Robin Bains hands. That would tell who pulled the trigger. <br>
Rumour around the office a few years back had it that a junior detective constable suggested swabbing David's hands and was shouted down by a more senior member. For the life of me I don't know why it didn't happen at Robin Bain's post mortem. It would be standard practice these days</p></blockquote>
<br>
Bugger, that would have saved a whole lot of hassle... -
<p>The single most disturbing aspect of the case was one of the jurors in the 2nd trial joining Bain for celebratory drinks afterwards...</p>
-
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Donsteppa" data-cid="602443" data-time="1470123555">
<div>
<p>I'm one of the (few!?) people who haven't made my mind up firmly either way.<br><br>
Whichever side I'm hearing from always seems compelling until I hear the other... And I haven't been that interested in the case to read every last detail to conclude which trumps which. Aucklandwarlord's link is damning, but then so was the interview I heard with Justice Binny tonight too ('how can he completely prove his innocence when the police destroyed some evidence earlier than they were supposed to' - to paraphrase.)<br><br>
On compensation, goodness knows how you put a price on that sort of thing... But on the surface of it, if you've spent 13 years in prison and then been found not guilty after the Privy Council intervened, then I find it hard to argue $0. If the $900k covers the bills and then some, then maybe that does the trick...</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>So to sum up it sounds like Police investigating more thoroughly could have saved a hell of a lot of time, money and delivered a more concrete verdict all those years ago ?</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I mean who can completely understand a families dynamics but I'd say it would be EXTREMLY unlikely that Robin Bain would have done away with them all except one ( but any family in which a 22 year old still has a paper run isn't quite run of the mill so who really knows )</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="MN5" data-cid="602432" data-time="1470122570">
<p>Well a quick read of Wikipedia confirmed that he has lost in the region of 4 mill and it's actually 4 books ( Christ, isn't one enough ? )<br><br>
That link from AW is pretty damning on Bain, no two ways about it.<br><br>
While we're on the topic can someone explain how Mark Lundy ( 500 ) got a retrial which ended in EXACTLY the same verdict ?</p>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>With an ego like his 4 books is probably just the start. If the 4 mill figure is a quote from him I'd take it with an Ayers rock sized grain of salt too.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The Dunedin cops at the time seemed like they had some serious issues . The poisoned professor case was around this time too and it resulted in two hung juries and an acquittal despite the accused telling her friend she would poison someone the exact way her ex was subsequently poisoned .<br><br>
I don't know how much of this book is true but if even half of it is the cops down there were in a very sorry state around the time Bain killed his family<br><a class="bbc_url" href="http://nzpca.co.nz/cover-ups-and-cop-outs-the-book/">http://nzpca.co.nz/cover-ups-and-cop-outs-the-book/</a></p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="MN5" data-cid="602439" data-time="1470123084">
<div>
<p>I know that technology has moved on since 1994 but ( aucklandwarlord, Crazy Horse if you're around ) wouldn't a forensics team be able to tell if a gunshot wound to the head was suicide or not ?</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Which one? Apparently the evidence indicated he was shot in the head twice. So did Robin shoot himself twice in the head with a .22 rifle or was it someone else?</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Siam" data-cid="602428" data-time="1470122058">
<div>
<p><strong>I used to sit next to him in psychology tutorials at Otago uni - you never forget those jerseys.</strong><br><br>
I don't know if he did it.<br><br>
But there's something awry in our country when you lose 13 years and don't get compo. I can feel empathy for that. It's the sort of shit I'd expect from a corrupt 3rd world place.<br><br>
Yes I understand that rules are followed but I expect better.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Thats even more disturbing than being paid to fuck an ugly Ginger. </p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="antipodean" data-cid="602437" data-time="1470122921">
<div>
<p>So if I understand this correctly it was either him killing everyone under the roof, or his father decided to let one of them do a paper run but kill everyone else including himself?</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Obviously Robin was a big fan of the ODT and didn't want his neighbours to miss out on reading their morning paper over breakfast.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="MN5" data-cid="602447" data-time="1470124075">
<div>
<p>So to sum up it sounds like Police investigating more thoroughly could have saved a hell of a lot of time, money and delivered a more concrete verdict all those years ago ?</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I mean who can completely understand a families dynamics but I'd say it would be EXTREMLY unlikely that Robin Bain would have done away with them all except one ( but any family in which a 22 year old still has a paper run isn't quite run of the mill so who really knows )</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p>and that's where other untested scenarios could possibly form an explanation. e.g. Robin killed all except Stephen (and obviously David, who was out), David comes home and sees the horrible situation, flips and kills Robin then has a struggle with Stephen and kills him too etc etc</p>
<p> </p>
<p>May sound far fetched but most of the arguing about who is right or wrong is only examining two exact scenarios when it could be that neither is true.</p>