David Bain
-
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Crucial" data-cid="602505" data-time="1470131311"><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<br><br>
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></blockquote>In which case he'd still be guilty of at least one murder, possibly two? I'm not sure "revenge for killing the others" would be a defence to killing Robin...<br><br>
Also, wasn't the struggle in Stephen's room? It would seem highly far fetched that the entire family was killed yet Stephen stays in his room until David gets home, they have a scuffle for no reason and David decides he's gonne kill him. David loses his glass lens and gets the scratches and bruises on him before shooting him dead with the gun he's just killed Robin with. <br><br>
The most bizarre thing for me with Robin being the killer is that He did it with a full bladder and got the paper in first. Surely you take a piss and then set about your task. You don't give a shit about reading about the Otago team for the coming weekend... -
.
-
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="aucklandwarlord" data-cid="602529" data-time="1470135013">
<div>
<p>In which case he'd still be guilty of at least one murder, possibly two? I'm not sure "revenge for killing the others" would be a defence to killing Robin...</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p>I'm not saying he is, just saying that the arguments are based on two scenarios only. 1. David killed everyone, went on his paper run, came back and killed Robin then tried to make it look like a murder/suicide and has steadfastly protested his innocence thereafter. or 2. Robin kills everyone while David is out and kills himself just as David comes home.</p>
<p>I actually find that the evidence wholly fits neither scenario which is also why there are so many back and forth nitpickings on matters.</p>
<p>It wouldn't surprise me in the least if something very ugly happened from both of them, with David's actions being spur of the moment and he almost immediately shut his memories off under stress.</p>
<p>Remember that David himself has never extrapolated on his original claim that Robin had killed everyone.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Crucial" data-cid="602532" data-time="1470135562"><p>
I'm not saying he is, just saying that the arguments are based on two scenarios only. 1. David killed everyone, went on his paper run, came back and killed Robin then tried to make it look like a murder/suicide and has steadfastly protested his innocence thereafter. or 2. Robin kills everyone while David is out and kills himself just as David comes home.<br>
I actually find that the evidence wholly fits neither scenario which is also why there are so many back and forth nitpickings on matters.<br>
It wouldn't surprise me in the least if something very ugly happened from both of them, with David's actions being spur of the moment and he almost immediately shut his memories off under stress.<br>
Remember that David himself has never extrapolated on his original claim that Robin had killed everyone.</p></blockquote>
<br>
Fair points. While I agree that it is focussed on two versions of events, that's probably because they're the most highly likely. Domestic murders are generally very straight forward. In any case that is examined to the nth degree, sometimes there are anomalies that don't quite fit in, but a case has to be presented warts and all. It's normally human error that causes these types of things (such as the discrepancy in the timing of the computer for the non-handwritten suicide/apology note), which often play a big part in a defence case.<br><br>
If David did kill them, I agree that he probably believes his own version of events a therefore shut out the exact sequence of events. -
As an aside, in the early 1990's, who would write a typed suicide note? Surely you pick up a pen and paper...
-
Et voilà . <br><br>
<a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://i.stuff.co.nz/national/82734851/Callinan-report-highlights-issues-in-David-Bains-innocence-appeal'>http://i.stuff.co.nz/national/82734851/Callinan-report-highlights-issues-in-David-Bains-innocence-appeal</a> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="aucklandwarlord" data-cid="602536" data-time="1470136419">
<div>
<p>As an aside, in the early 1990's, who would write a typed suicide note? Surely you pick up a pen and paper...</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>And he did it on the family computer didn't he? Must have taken a while to boot up....</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="canefan" data-cid="602540" data-time="1470137202">
<div>
<p>And he did it on the family computer didn't he? Must have taken a while to boot up....</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Not to forget the dial-up modem, dot matrix printer, MS-DOS 5.0.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Billy Tell" data-cid="602539" data-time="1470137175">
<div>
<p>Et voilà .<br><br><a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://i.stuff.co.nz/national/82734851/Callinan-report-highlights-issues-in-David-Bains-innocence-appeal'>http://i.stuff.co.nz/national/82734851/Callinan-report-highlights-issues-in-David-Bains-innocence-appeal</a></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Martin Van Beynen has written some great articles in the wash up of the trial and subsequent publicity. After the trial, while Wendy Petrie was busy fist pumping, jurors were hugging Bain and John Campbell was standing next to Bain with the world's biggest hard-on, Van Beynen wrote an article saying how he thought the jury had got it wrong and how half the jury were either struggling to stay awake or not paying attention to what was going on. It was a refreshing swim against the tide from the other articles that were published at the time</p>
<p> </p>
<p>From Callihan's report regarding not everything adding up perfectly</p>
<p> </p>
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote">
<p> </p>
<p>People in real life and the courts that adjudicate upon conflicting facts know that all of the questions cannot always be answered, and all of the issues neatly resolves. This is such a case</p>
</blockquote> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="aucklandwarlord" data-cid="602529" data-time="1470135013">
<div>
<p>In which case he'd still be guilty of at least one murder, possibly two? I'm not sure "revenge for killing the others" would be a defence to killing Robin...<br><br>
Also, wasn't the struggle in Stephen's room? It would seem highly far fetched that the entire family was killed yet Stephen stays in his room until David gets home, they have a scuffle for no reason and David decides he's gonne kill him. David loses his glass lens and gets the scratches and bruises on him before shooting him dead with the gun he's just killed Robin with.<br><br>
The most bizarre thing for me with Robin being the killer is that He did it with a full bladder and got the paper in first.<strong> Surely you take a piss and then set about your task.</strong> You don't give a shit about reading about the Otago team for the coming weekend...</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>
Morning wood?</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="aucklandwarlord" data-cid="602547" data-time="1470140418">
<div>
<p>Martin Van Beynen has written some great articles in the wash up of the trial and subsequent publicity. After the trial, while Wendy Petrie was busy fist pumping, jurors were hugging Bain and John Campbell was standing next to Bain with the world's biggest hard-on, Van Beynen wrote an article saying how he thought the jury had got it wrong and how half the jury were either struggling to stay awake or not paying attention to what was going on. It was a refreshing swim against the tide from the other articles that were published at the time</p>
<p> </p>
<p>From Callihan's report regarding not everything adding up perfectly</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>The trouble with juries in such case is the pool of jurors to choose from. Without casting aspersions, you are basically looking at</p>
<p> </p>
<p>1) Beneficiaries</p>
<p>2) Unemployed/"home-maker"</p>
<p>3) Retired</p>
<p> </p>
<p>And ideally, 12 people who had never ever heard of David Bain. I remember reading an interview with the guy who had drinks with Bain after the verdict. Did not paint a pretty picture of impartiality.</p> -
<p><a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='https://admin.beehive.govt.nz/sites/all/files/Ian Callinan Report.pdf'>https://admin.beehive.govt.nz/sites/all/files/Ian Callinan Report.pdf</a></p>
<p> </p>
<p>Took me about 2 hours to get through it. Fairly engrossing. Well-written.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>It's much harder to conclude it was Robin than David IMHO...and that's what the judge thought too.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I suppose the crown thought it was easier to finally get rid of the whole thing with $925,000 of your tax money, rather than fight the inevitable appeal, and waste $925,000 on lawyer's fees.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Bain should be happy he got $900,000 plus, and leave it at that.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I have no problem with him being out of prison: he served 13 of his mandatory minimum16 years jail-time, and there is no suggestion he is a danger to the public at large.</p> -
My issue with his father doing it that Robin was a pretty small guy in comparison to his sons , a lot older and not exactly in good shape. I don't believe he would have been able to wrestle his younger son and beat him . <br>
Karam smeared the rest of the family by saying they don't support Bain because they inherited the estate . It's far more likely that knowing him better than any of us they think David Bain is guilty. -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="MN5" data-cid="602447" data-time="1470124075"><p><br>
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>
<br>
If you are in a state of mind where you are going to kill your family then kill yourself you are not thinking like a normal person. Anything is possible I suppose. -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="canefan" data-cid="602459" data-time="1470125489"><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><br>
I investigated a suicide where the guy went into the backyard and shot himself in the head. Unfortunately for him the shot didn't kill him so the poor bugger walked back into the house, got another bullet and then returned to the back yard to finish the job. So it is possible. -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Crazy Horse" data-cid="602626" data-time="1470175741">
<div>
<p>If you are in a state of mind where you are going to kill your family then kill yourself you are not thinking like a normal person. Anything is possible I suppose.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>some are extremely clear in<strong> their</strong> minds though about what they are doing (based on reports leading upto and investigating the circumstances I have had to read) and plan it carefully</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="taniwharugby" data-cid="602678" data-time="1470186313"><p>
some are extremely clear in<strong> their</strong> minds though about what they are doing (based on reports leading upto and investigating the circumstances I have had to read) and plan it carefully</p></blockquote>
U<br>
Agree, but to do something like that, planned or not, something needs to be misfiring inside the head. -
<p>yeah it is odd as it shows they (particulalrly if the theories of Robin are true that he killed his family then himself) are wired completely wrong, but doesn't mean they haven't thought the scenario through and planned for something going wrong, which one I came across did....</p>
-
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="aucklandwarlord" data-cid="602536" data-time="1470136419">
<div>
<p>As an aside, in the early 1990's, who would write a typed suicide note? Surely you pick up a pen and paper...</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Yeah - I've written that here before. If Robin takes a pen and paper and writes his, "Sorry, you're the only one who deserves to stay" note, it's case closed - so it's pretty inconvenient (or convenient) for David that he didn't.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>If he's pulling a murder suicide, why does he put on (David's) gloves to do it?</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Why does he shoot himself left handed - pulling a Dan Carter?</p>
<p> </p>
<p>How does he fight with Stephen and get no bruises - and win?</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Might need to re-read some stuff with an open mind, but there's too much circumstantial stuff that points to David to me.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Crucial" data-cid="602413" data-time="1470120766">
<div>
<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>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>I'm more inclined to think that either David is innocent or he's a dangerous psychopath.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>If he did it, he's gone to some pretty significant lengths to try to pin it on Robin.</p>