David Bain
-
<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> -
<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>