David Bain compensation
March 26th, 2010 at 9:28 am by David FarrarPersonally I can’t wait for a QC to be appointed to investigate the case, and declare, on the balance of probabilities, whether it was Robin or David who killed the Bain Family.
If a senior QC really finds that on balance of probabilities it was not David, then he deserves compensation.
And if the QC does not make that finding, then it may effectively clear Robin’s name, and David will become our own OJ Simpson – legally acquitted by found on the balance of probabilities to have been liable.
Related posts:
- Has Bain been found innocent on balance of probabilities
- Bain faces steep hurdle
- Bain’s compensation quest
- Bain juror says no compo
March 26th, 2010 at 9:45 am
This is not the time for David to be attracting attention to himself. I’m sure he can get some ready cash off flogging the story of his bizare family to the worlds womens trash mags (where are the feminists on THAT issue?).
He should count himself exceedingly fortunate to be free and just keep werry werry quiet.
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 9:55 am
Whilst we all know it is more likely that he did it, almost certain…it is not as certain as OJ which is just unbelievable. If you read about the evidence in that case it was just cringe worthy how badly they got it wrong.
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 10:01 am
We don’t all know it.
Vote:Many in this forum decry religious belief.
Presenting your own convictions as if they were truth is similar to proclaiming religious belief.
March 26th, 2010 at 10:03 am
I have a horrible feeling that the gummint will appoint a QC who is more inclined to find in favour of Bain.
The other point about compensation is this, how come it is so easy for Bain to get a hearing yet Susan Couch has had to fight tooth and nail (and two governments who blocked her at every turn) to even get a hearing for her much deserved compensation package.
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 10:07 am
Interesting indeed. I’m sure it wasn’t the father and I’m very sure the first trial got it right. So what I find most interesting is what goes on in the mind of David Bain. Has he convinced himself that he didn’t do it? Otherwise, if it was me I would not want any further scrutiny of this case. I’m guessing that David believes his own BS and has – over the years – convinced himself that he didn’t do it.
A good site for anyone who wants to reacquaint themselves with the evidence: http://davidbain.counterspin.co.nz/
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 10:11 am
The problem for Bain is not that someone has to prove his guilt as with his trial, but he has to prove he was innocent. Thats a very big ask, and if he fails to do so then he will end up wearing the label of the guy who didn’t prove he was innocent rather his current “not guilty” status.
This is a big gamble for him and I don’t think its in his best interests. I’m not entirely sure it was his own decision either.
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 10:13 am
The question is quite simple. Is it more likely that David killed his entire family or is it more likely that Robin did it (with a full bladder)?
Good luck with that.
I wonder if Karam et al have become problem gamblers. They’ve beaten the system once so they think they can keep doing it?
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 10:17 am
Thats would be what i’m thinking GPT1.
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 10:18 am
BB – David does not get a hearing. Compensation payments have nothing to do with the Courts and everything to do with the Government. They are ex gratia payments and are considered by the Minister of Justice and cabinet. The process is outlined in the cabinet manual. There is no legal right to compensation for wrongful conviction and imprisonment in New Zealand.
In the Croucher case the issue was whether a cause of action existed that Croucher could sue on. The Supreme Court have just confirmed there is, albeit one with a bar set perhaps oppresively high. Without a cause of action, she can’t sue. That was the issue.
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 10:20 am
It does not make sense that Robin did it. But then I was not convinced that David did it either. Quite frankly, I felt that the investigation and the trails did not present clear evidence either way. It will be interesting to see the outcome of this. If he’s guilty, not much point in seeking compensation, I would have thought. But then If he’s guilty, I have no idea how his mind would work.
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 10:34 am
He will definately kill again.
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 10:42 am
All the “experts” will argue whether the killer was Robin or David. Compensation may or may not be paid. Yet Peter Ellis served seven years in prison for a crime THAT DID NOT EVEN HAPPEN. He was astonishingly never once assaulted in prison as none of the inmates considered him to be a paedophile. He was denied parole twice for daring to claim his innocence and not accept contrition. He was given no retrial. He was given no genuine enquiry. He was given no compensation. It is the biggest blot in the criminal history of New Zealand
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 10:43 am
Cheese you evidence please. I think hes about as dangerous as toe fungus.
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 10:45 am
Based on the evidence I’ve heard I think it’s far from certain either way – some aspects of the case nudge me one way, and some aspects nudge me the other. Potentially damning aspects seem to have a counter damn. But I haven’t listened through the whole trials.
Is it simply assumed that this is significant, or has there been supporting evidence?
If I hear a possum making a racket in the early morning (or the dog make a racket telling me there’s a possum) I get up and shoot it before I think of having a piss.
Murray: I agree that the cheese has major holes in it’s argument.
Vote:Fisiani : I agree on Peter Ellis.
March 26th, 2010 at 10:47 am
@ GPT1 and Murray – I daresay that this is at least as much Karam’s decision as it is Bain’s. The “not guilty” verdict ran the risk of ending his time in the media spotlight, and the commercial opportunities that arose as a result. After all, he’s written THREE books on essentially the same subject. At least this will keep the case in the papers for a while longer.
If I were Bain (God forbid!), I would be slinking off overseas somewhere and starting afresh, away from the glare of publicity.
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 10:48 am
This is a difficult issue. I do believe that Bain should be due a measure of compensation, given the Privy Council quashed the conviction on the basis that a miscarriage of justice hed occurred.
The burden of proof that Bain has to establish is difficult. But that is besides the point. The justice system is set up so that it is protecetd from it’s own shortcomings.
For any wrongly convicted man to prove his innocence after 13 years incarceration is a huge burden of proof. A prosecution is therefore sheltered from any liability. Did Bain kill his family. The possibility definately exists. But according to the law, Bain was wrongly convicted and as a result, has spent 13 years behind bars. Even if you believe that that Bain killed his family, I find the situation that the justice system can be proven wrong in a court of law, and not be liable for the effects of those decisions, laughable.
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 10:59 am
If you were working at immigration would you let him in to your country Inv?
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 11:01 am
Watch the compensation claim to include “costs” for karam et al
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 11:04 am
Good point, Murray. IIRC, Joe Karam has a deal with David to split the proceeds of his books and other revenue. So perhaps David knows he did it, but is surrounded by a passionate group who believe him innocent so even if he wanted to slink away and count his lucky stars, he cannot.
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 11:07 am
He’s probably a lovely bloke, but I certainly wouldn’t give him a turn on the 22 if we were out possum shooting.
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 11:11 am
“Watch the compensation claim to include “costs” for karam et al”
They got legal aid IIRC
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 11:14 am
Interesting question Murray – he has no convictions, of course ….
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 11:20 am
Yes but you don’t need a conviction to be labeled undesirable. Entering someone elses country is a privilage not a right.
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 11:38 am
Murray/Pete George
Sorry I was being facetious.
But then again it might only take something like a bit of sexual humiliation to get the black hands back in action.
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 11:48 am
David,
We have reason to believe that ‘balance of probabilities’ may not apply because Karam is applying for compensation under some special criteria. In other words he is trying to circumvent the system by making a general plea.
There is all the more reason to sign our petition at http://davidbain.counterspin.co.nz/node/add/signature Our aim is 10,000 signatures, then we’ll take it to parliament. People can sign anonymously which means we have your details but the public cannot see them.
Thanks
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 11:55 am
Murray
Underestimate toe fungus at your peril.
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 11:58 am
Don’t fear the fungus!
MORE COWBELL!!!!!
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 11:59 am
Inventory 2 – your point about just quietly sliding off the radar (no doubt counting your good fortune) is well made. Of course, I suspect that Bain has convinced himself that he is innocent and has been wrongly convicted (if he hasn’t, Karam et al probably have) and therefore deserving of compensation.
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 12:16 pm
This is Karem looking for his pay day. His last book deal went tits up after the Bain phone call was made public which wasn’t allowed in at the trial.
Bain (David) is a murderer, he killed his entire family. Juries fuck up every day, look at the spy base rabble.
A criminal trial is a complex thing, if you voted for MMP or labour and were on that jury you would obviuosly be too stupid to understand something as involved as this case was. The Jury system is a farce.
DPF contact Crown Law in Wellington and get expert comment from them not a clown like Karem or 21 year old “journalists’
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 12:19 pm
surely he is entittled to compensation? what is the going rate for 13 years?
10,000 signature? ten thousands fuck all of fuck all, and the letter isn’t exactly deep.
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 12:22 pm
Kent – this special plea you speak about is what the Minister will have a QC consider on the balance of probabilities I suspect. As I mentioned earlier, the courts are not involved in this process.
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 12:23 pm
“We, the undersigned, are petitioning you as Minister of Justice to hand David Bain over to us and let us string ‘im up – because we all “know” full well that he did it.”
Sorry Kent Parker, won’t be signing.
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 12:27 pm
If David Bain is innocent, let him open his mouth and talk.What is he frightened of?
Perhaps a QC could examine and re-examine him under oath. A QC should also be able to talk to people who were not allowed to give evidence at the trial, such as those who knew his sister at the time of her murder, and made interesting statements about the family behaviour then.
Meanwhile, as Fisiani pointed out in a 10.42 post, the great injustice of the trial and imprisonment of Peter Ellis in the Christchurch hysteria casel goes uncorrected. Power declined to look further into the Ellis case, whereas Don Brash indicated he was sympathetic to an Ellis inquiry. Power and National need to watch their step with this Bain claim.
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 12:30 pm
NOt1tocommentoften: I have spoken to a number of media today and they are all saying similar things, that Karam has created his own category and criteria upon which to judge his compensation bid. With legal aid you can buy anything!
RRM, shame
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 1:36 pm
Before David Bain receives $ 2 million compensation I would like to know -
• Did Robin Bain’s injuries show gunshot residue consistent with suicide or a more remote shooting?
• What of David’s bizarre behaviour [St Kilda sand-hills with friends] between the murders and his arrest.
• With rumours of incest being local hearsay, would Robin [beyond caring?] or David [failed relationship with girlfriend?] stand more ‘social’ damage from any ‘revelations’? Was not David most instrumental in Laniet being home at the time of the killings?
• What of David’s reputed plan to use his paper-round as an alibi in a possible rape of a local jogger?
These are just a few points I have wondered about before even considering the likes of the background suggested in http://davidbain.counterspin.co.nz/davids-motive
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 1:51 pm
Kent – well you can attempt to create criteria – I could too. The government can say “no, we have procedures in place for dealing with this sort of thing, and these will be followed.” Why do you think SP will listen to Karam? And why do you think anyone or anything has been bought?!
It is like me suggesting I have been granted a right to a million dollars just because I wrote to the Minister telling him that I deserve it.
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 1:59 pm
NOt1tocommentoften, at this stage I am still finding out myself what basis the compensation bid is being made on. I am sure that the papers will be full of it over the coming days.
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 2:03 pm
How many people have read James McNeish’s The Mask of Sanity?
motives for David are pretty clear in there
great read
I get sick of people saying David had no motive
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 2:09 pm
Has anybody in any reading of the case, or any other sources, seen reference to
Vote:what seems a crucial point –
• Did Robin Bain’s injuries show gunshot residue consistent with suicide or a more remote shooting?
March 26th, 2010 at 2:10 pm
So why assert something you have no knowledge of Kent? Even if Karam has ATTEMPTED to create his own criteria this doesn’t mean they WILL be taken into account be the Minister.
I think your attempt to influence this process is outrageous. Imagine writing to a judge to try and impact on the process. Let an impartial tribunal, whether or not it be one QC or three lay members or whatever, consider this. You clearly have a vested interest and are absolutely partisan.
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 2:17 pm
NOt1, if we can have Citizens Initiated Referenda why shouldn’t we have Citizens Initiated Justice? That would sort a few things out (probably including overpopulation).
Direct Democracy – Direct Justice?
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 2:20 pm
Like gays and racial minorities Pete?
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 2:41 pm
Yvette, I followed the case pretty closely at the time and I don’t remember anything about this. So, I’m guessing that this evidence or otherwise wasn’t gathered. I would recommend reading the evidence on http://davidbain.counterspin.co.nz if you haven’t already done so.
There is so much evidence against David and very little against Robin. E.g. why would an older teacher, presumably used to writing notes/comments etc all day by hand, choose to leave a one-line suicide note on a computer?
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 2:48 pm
NOt1tocommentoften, I didn’t say I had ‘no knowledge’ and saying ‘we have reason to believe’ hardly seems to be asserting something. We, you me and the media are still finding out the full story. It is not a foregone conclusion that this will be decided in a nicely sealed room by a QC. Watch this space.
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 2:49 pm
What about:
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 3:28 pm
Now whilst im still not sure about David Bain dont you just love the high hurdle both he and Susan Couch have been set as opposed to the hurdle the State sets itself.
Let me explain. Take OSH legislation. The hurdle for the Crown is to prove a breach of the Act and fair enough. Offenders and are named and shamed in public and fined and can be imprisoned. Companies and Directors.
Now lets look at the Susan Couch matter. NO name or shame took place. We dont know it was that screwed up. Susan ahs to prove almost the impossible against Corrections
Same as David he has to prove his innocence even though the Judical system only required that a jury found on the balance that he was not guilty.
See how the State manipulates the position to favour itself when it suits and disfavours the citizen when it suits.
That why we have a LEGAL system not a JUSTICE system. Because if we had a JUSTICE system the pollies civil servants and the Judicary would shit itself witless.
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 3:36 pm
In a LEGAL system, the side with the most money stands a better chance of winning…
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 3:50 pm
David Bain constipation.
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 4:32 pm
Lastmanstanding
I have difficulty with your logic. In the case of a prosecution under Health and Safety legislation, the Crown must prove an offence beyond reasonable doubt. Usually, the charge relates to a separate identifiable act.
In the case of David Bain, the Crown , making the allegation against Bain , was also obliged to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. The judicial system did not require that a jury find “on the balance that he was not guilty”. It required proof beyond reasonable doubt that he was guilty. Your comment about a requirement that a jury must find absence of guilt is incorrect.
Susan Couch is suing for exemplary damages. Exemplary damage are damages in the nature of a penalty and involve a contumelious disregard for the rights of the plaintiff. Exemplary damages can arise from an individual and identifiable act (such as an assault). In this case, she seems to me to be basing her claim on a series of acts or omissions which led to a violent criminal being released into the community in circumstances where it was foreseeable that some harm could follow.
It may well be that Susan Couch can point to a specific decision by an individual which led to Bell’s offending. It may be that she has to rely on a series of decisions by a number of individuals. That evidence has yet to come out.
You overlook the fact that it is the judicial system that has decided that a cause of action may exist against Corrections and has allowed her to proceed.
If you are of the view that David should not have to prove his innocence and that his entitlement to compensation arises once acquitted, where do you draw the line? If a bona fide prosecution is brought but fails, does every defendant who is incarcerated pending trial get compensation? What about the gang members who are acquitted as a result of some undisclosed witness intimidation?
Unless David Bain can establishes liability based on the tort of false imprisonment (which cannot be established in this case), he has no right to compensation.
The government (not the judicial system) has established guidelines for compensating where there has been unjust detention. Those guidelines require that a person claiming compensation proves innocence on the balance of probabilities. If you have a more acceptable line to draw in the sand, I would be interested in hearing it.
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 4:55 pm
lastmanstanding comments:
And that’s why, even if you’re successful in suing and winning compensation, you’re suing the “Crown”, as if some doddery old German woman had tasered you, planted a bit of evidence, withheld other evidence useful to the defence, perjured themselves on the stand, slept through most of the trial, wrongly instructed the jury etc etc.
Goodness me, it would never do to have police, prosecutors and judges held personally responsible for their incompetence or malicious acts, much less hold them accountable. No, they get left their to continue their corruption of justice while the poor old Queen cops the blame and dips into her vault.
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 5:22 pm
How about a pardon for Scott Watson first? That is the most dodgy of these cases.
http://www.medialawjournal.co.nz/?page_id=40
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 5:55 pm
I think it is going to take a while for the media to work out what the true situation is. I just heard on Prime News that it will be going before a QC as expected. So who knows yet.
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 6:20 pm
I just looked on Stuff.co.nz, I was sickened to see that 42.8% of voters in their current poll think Bain deserves compensation. How could so many NZers (albeit stuff readers) think this guy was innocent? Did Joe Karam vote 3000 times?
The guy talked about using his exact same paper-boy alibi to “rape a jogger”! (Plus all the material evidence against him).
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 6:43 pm
Strange isn’t it – so many people that obviously weren’t even on the jury think they know there was insufficient evidence to convict beyond reasonable doubt.
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 6:45 pm
> even if he wanted to slink away and count his lucky stars, he cannot.
Indeed. It makes you wonder whether it would get on his nerves enough that he might …
… take up another job delivering newspapers?
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 6:58 pm
Bob R
While Watson may well be innocent I could not give a shit that he is banged up.
Call it a case of natural justice.
Vote:March 26th, 2010 at 10:02 pm
Pete George posted at 6.43:
Please do not use this jury as an example of wise citizens. Some of the jury members even partied with the David Bain mob almost straight after the trial ended. What blockheads.
I guess that, with the miscarriage of justice in the jury verdict on the Waihopai wireless base vandalism, addle-headed leftits now regard juries as sacrosanct.
With busy people dodging low-compensation for often drawn out jury service, juries now must contain a proportion of beneficiaries, bludgers, addicts, and yet-to-be detected crooks that’s even higher than these people exist in the NZ population as a whole.
I wouldn’t be surprised if even Phllip Ure — Philu – could get on a jury these days. Imagine the stunned court reaction if he was elected foreman, and when asked for the jury’s verdict, Philu replied in his usual deranged style. That is a verdict full of fullstops and gurgling garble that could pass for double-encoded transmissions by a stoned Morse code signaller.
Vote:March 27th, 2010 at 8:21 am
Even though I think David killed his family, I believe he is entitled to some compensation. If all the evidence had been presented at his first trial, he’d probably have been acquitted. In other words, he wouldn’t have served 13 years in prison. That alone must count for something. Maybe there should be two tiers when it comes to compensating the wrongly convicted. All wrongly convicted people could receive, say, $10,000 for every year they are in prison but those who can demonstrate that they are likely to be innocent get $100,000 per year. David would get $10,000 per year but not the higher sum.
Philospohically I am opposed to an accused having to prove his innocence. In the Peter Ellis case, there is no clear evidence that any child was sexually abused. If there is no clear evidence of a crime, how on earth would Ellis be able to prove his innocence?
Vote:March 27th, 2010 at 1:49 pm
“While Watson may well be innocent I could not give a shit that he is banged up.”
Clearly you are insane big blouse. What a disgrace you are. What a wacko!
Vote:April 14th, 2010 at 6:21 pm
The whole case Indicates:
Vote:* Opinions can be heavily influenced by media.
* Evidence can be ignored or interpreted rather interestingly.
* A high percentage of Kiwis love supporting the under-dog.
May 25th, 2010 at 8:24 am
An explanation of the extraordinary circumstances hurdle required for the Bain team to overcome can be found here: http://davidbain.counterspin.co.nz/news/explanation-of-extraordinary-circumstances . This comes straight from the Ministry of Justice.
Vote:July 20th, 2010 at 1:52 pm
Hi can anyone tell me?
If you are convicted of a crime and sent to prison, and later it is discovered that the crown failed to disclose a inducement to a crown witness (after being asked to by the trial judge) can you be compensated?
I was convicted and sentanced to 5 years prison, but during the trial i made an application to the judge to have the crwon witness evidence thrown out as i believed that he was being given an injucment, The judge asked the crown prosecutor to make inquiries as to if the witness was recieving an inducment, the prosecutor recieved a copy of a sentance indicator relating to the witnes showing he was getting 2 years off his sentance for his co=operation with the police and the crown in my trial, however the crown prosecutor then retyped the sentance indicator leaving out the fact he was recieving the injucment, then presented it to my trial judge, so my application to have the witness evidence was dismissed was itself dismissed and the evidence was heard. The evidence of this crown witness was describe by the judge as “the glue that held the crown case toghehter” I was convicted and sentaced to 5 years jail, after 14 months i had my conviction quashed as i presented to the court of appleal the full sentace indicator showing the injucment, the court of appeal ruled that a misscarrage of justice had occoured, and ordered a re-trial, the crown chose not to offer any evidence at the re-trial so i applied for a section 357 ( i think) and all charges were dismissed. basicly i want to know if i can prove that the crown misled the court (which i can) can i be compensated?
Vote:thanks for any help
August 6th, 2010 at 7:21 pm
I’m just replying to a comment about how david could sell his story to make money if his compo falls through the thing is that he wouldn’t want to tell people, i believe if your granted a retrail then you should have to take the stand in order to put your side of the story through not a QC to fabricate a storie line or a load of garbage that they manage to sell as a defence. Any way it does not matter any more he’ off and you won’t here a peep out of him ever again because he knows just how lucky he is, that is my opinion of him and i’ve manage to talk to him and i believe that he did do that, of course mr Karam believes that he is innocent he has to he’s convinced himself of that.
Vote:October 24th, 2010 at 10:59 am
David Bain does not have to prove he is innocent, to get compensation.
If he is able to demonstrate his inability to prove his innocence is because the police did not collect the right evidence and/or conduct their investigation in such a manner, that it prevents him of proving his innocence, his application may still be successful.
There are several reasons why he may use this point.
1. No GSR tests conducted within the correct time frame.
2. The destruction of evidence by burning the crime scene. (It is argued that David agreed to this, but at the time, he was hardly in a position to understand and accept the consequences of this action)
3. The Police failure to secure and protect the crime scene on the day of the killings.
plus various other known errors including the early decision that David or Robin were responsible, and as such, any alternative evidence was overlooked, ignored or destroyed.
Proving his innocence is not a requirement despite what the Counterspin group would have a believe, there is sufficient movement within the guidelines to allow for the situation David Bain is in.
Vote: