Hope legal aid isn’t funding this

January 30th, 2013 at 4:36 pm by David Farrar

The Herald reports:

has filed a High Court claim against Justice Minister Judith Collins seeking a judicial review of her actions since she received the Justice Binnie report last August.

The claim includes allegations Ms Collins has breached Mr Bain’s rights to natural justice and his rights under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, acted in bad faith, abused her power, and acted in a biased, unreasonable and predetermined manner.

Mr Bain’s long time supporter Joe Karam said in a statement today that Ms Collins had stated she intended to recommend further options to Cabinet on Monday.

“In the circumstances, a request has been made to the Crown that any further action in relation to David’s claim be deferred pending the outcome of this judicial review,” Mr Karam said.

He said Mr Bain had “anguished” over the prospect of returning to court and did so only reluctantly.

It’s a delaying tactic, which is ironic as they have complained about the delays.

Ms Collins said the compensation application fell outside Cabinet guidelines and was entirely at Cabinet’s discretion.

“I have taken steps to ensure the process is fair and proper throughout.

“Put simply, it would be unacceptable for Cabinet to base its decision for compensation on an unsafe and flawed report. That would not have resulted in justice for anyone, let alone Mr Bain.”

She said Mr Bain’s request for the Government to put the compensation application on hold while a judicial review went ahead would only result in a further delay.

Ms Collins would not comment further while the matter was before the Courts.

I would be amazed if the judicial review gets anywhere. The Bain claim for compensation in fact falls outside the Cabinet guidelines. Bain and Karam have asked for Cabinet to use their discretion to give him compensation even though he doesn’t qualify outside the guidelines. It would be highly unusual for the courts to injunct a Minister from reporting an issue to Cabinet involving a discretionary decision.

The Cabinet could in fact have just said “No, you do not qualify – go away”.

Tags:

2,915 Responses to “Hope legal aid isn’t funding this”

  1. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    bhudson will be pleased.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 14 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Kleva Kiwi (281 comments) says:

    I predict another undying thread…

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. RF (1,259 comments) says:

    Iceberg ahead. Man the life boats.

    Bain and his mate have just sunk their money ship.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 113 Thumb down 121 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. m@tt (587 comments) says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Unpopular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 63 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Longknives (4,384 comments) says:

    Did he ever get his beloved rifle back? For a while that was all he seemed interested in….creepy weirdo…

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 93 Thumb down 55 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Unpopular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 43 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Unpopular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 37 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. lastmanstanding (1,200 comments) says:

    I have yet to have an explaination of what Judge Binnie was required to do. Why was he hired and what was his TORs. It seems that unless his TORs were to determine whether or not Bain should get any compo then there was no earthly reason to hire him. If compo or no compo WTF did my taxes pay for.
    And this bint Collins seems to have no quarms about wasting my taxes on endless reports.

    I suspect she doesnt have the guts to say NO and so hoped that Binnie would say NO for her.

    Yet another of the gutless pollies that we are saddled with.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 21 Thumb down 19 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Belinda (126 comments) says:

    Karam will probably offer soon to cancel the judicial review under the guise of saving the country money, like he thought it would be a good idea to cancel the second trial.
    Please tell me he can’t take this to the Privy council if he loses.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 51 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Barnsley Bill (973 comments) says:

    lastidiotstanding.
    Hon Judith Collins did not contract Binnie. That cockup was created by the now retired minister who spends all day eating sausage rolls at Westpac.

    My theory on what is happening here;
    In much the same way that the fat german criminal Kim Dotcom is doing everything he can to delay an outcome.
    Bain and his team will now try and delay until after a change of government.
    Kim Dotcom will pay Labour to make his problems go away and Bain will already have a verbal undertaking to get a payout from labour.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 40 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    lastmanstanding (953) Says:
    January 30th, 2013 at 4:58 pm

    This is part of the mandate for Binnie from Simon Power
    The bit missing is all the back ground regarding court cases etc.

    Dear Justice Binnie
    Minister of Consumer Affairs
    Associate Minister of Finance
    Deputy Leader of the House
    CLAIM
    FOR
    COMPENSATION
    FOR
    WRONGFUL
    CONVICTION
    AND
    IMPRISONMENT: DAVID CULLEN BAIN
    1 .
    Thank you for agreeing to provide advice on Mr David Cullen Bain’s claim for ex
    gratia compensation for wrongful conviction and imprisonment.
    This letter is to
    formally instruct you in this matter.
    2.
    The specific points on which I seek your advice are set out below in paragraphs
    45 and 46. I will first provide you with some background to the claim.
    Background to claim (cut)

    Approach to Mr Bain’s claim
    44.
    Assessment of this compensation claim will take place in two stages. Firstly, you
    will provide advice on the issues set out in paragraph 45. If, based on your advice,
    Cabinet considers that the “extraordinary circumstances” test has been made out,
    Cabinet will then determine whether or not to exercise its discretion to pay
    compensation. If Cabinet determines that compensation will be paid, the second
    step will be for you to make a recommendation as to the quantum of the payment.
    Cabinet will then decide whether or not to accept that recommendation.
    45.
    Accordingly, at this time I seek your advice on:

    whether you are satisfied that Mr Bain is innocent on the balance of
    probabilities and, if so, whether he is also innocent beyond reasonable
    doubt; and

    any factors particular to Mr Bain’s case (apart from your assessment of
    innocence beyond reasonable doubt) that you consider are relevant to the
    Executive’s assessment of whether there are extraordinary circumstances
    such that it is in the interests of justice to consider his claim.
    46.
    Because the question of whether “extraordinary circumstances” apply in a
    particular case is ultimately a judgement for the Executive to make I am seeking
    advice on factors you consider relevant to this assessment rather than an opinion
    on whether Mr Bain’s application qualifies for the exercise of the residual discretion
    reserved by Cabinet.
    Administrative matters
    47.
    The Ministry has already informed both the claimant and the Crown Law Office that
    you have been appointed to assess the claim.
    I have publicly announced your
    appointment. The press release is attached.
    48.
    The Ministry’s role, while you are assessing this claim, will be to provide support as
    required and assist you to liaise with parties and witnesses. The usual approach is
    to treat both the claimant and the Crown Law Office (a government department
    headed by the Solicitor-General and responsible for the prosecution process in the
    criminal justice system) as parties to a claim and both will be expected to provide
    submissions.
    49.
    The Ministry has provided certain documents that will be of assistance for you to
    familiarise yourself with the case:

    R v Bain [1 996] 1 NZLR 1 29 (CA);

    Commissioner of Police and Police Complaints Authority Joint Review:
    Report dated 26 November 1 997;

    Ministry of Justice report on Bain application for the exercise of the Royal
    prerogative of mercy;

    Report by Sir Thomas Thorp on Sain application for the exercise of the
    Royal prerogative of mercy;

    R v Bain [2004] 1 NZLR 638 (CA);

    Bain v R (2007) 23 CRNZ 71 (PC);

    Documents relating to 2009 retrial:
    o
    Notes of evidence;
    o
    List of exhibits;
    o
    Judge’s summing up;
    o
    Pre-trial rulings; and

    Notification of claim for compensation and affidavit of David Cullen Bain.
    I
    l
    I
    I
    50.
    The Ministry can also arrange for you to access the files relating to the claimant’s
    first trial and 2009 retrial as well as the relevant Court of Appeal files.

    I am happy to leave to your discretion the manner in which you
    undertake this work. I suggest that you may wish to liaise generally with Mr Jeff
    Orr, Chief Legal Counsel at the Ministry. If you would find it useful, Mr Orr will be
    able to provide you with information about the approach taken by previous
    appointees to the assessment of compensation claims.

    Hon Simon Power
    Minister of Justice

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 16 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Manolo (13,299 comments) says:

    The nutters will go for a new record record of 10,000+ comments.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Unpopular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 47 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Dean Papa (707 comments) says:

    an hourly rate of $450.00 !!

    heck, I’ll do if for half that, and would produce something a darned sight more coherent than that ponce binnie managed. It’s a pity we can’t get one of those FBI profilers to do it. Someone who understands the criminal mind, and will ask the hard questions.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 43 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. lastmanstanding (1,200 comments) says:

    OK so it was Power who kicked for touch but IMHO Ministers have to be prepared to stand up and be counted and not keep on hiding behind endless reports.

    Again IMHO the Cabinet should have had the courage to either pay compo or say NO.

    At some point and after all the trials Privy Council etc etc the time had come to either piss or get off the pot. Power didnt.

    Collins could have thanked Binnie for his report and then made a decision but she didnt and hasnt and doesnt look like making one.

    Thats my point. I pay these people to make decisions NOT to hide away behind reports

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    Judith
    The other Judith knows all about those lies David Bain told Binnie.
    I reckon Karam and co have bitten off more than they can chew here, you mark my words.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 58 Thumb down 22 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Manolo (8,899) Says:
    January 30th, 2013 at 5:11 pm

    If we were truly nutty, we’d go for a million! The true test of nuttiness cannot be decided by a sane person. ;-)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. lastmanstanding (1,200 comments) says:

    Judith

    You have confirmed my suspicions. The problem was Collins didnt like the answer so she decided to shop around to get the ome she wanted.

    Rule 101 when you commission any report is always make sure it will read the way you want it to.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Mark (1,356 comments) says:

    The saga goes on. It will achieve little other than pissing Collins off. One suspects that the Bain team has determined whe has nothing to lose as Collins has already put her cards on the table in respect of any compensation. Perhaps Karam et all has decided to play Collins at her own game of bluff and bluster.

    What pisses me off is that we as the tax payer continue to pay and pay. I recall a cartoon from a few years back that had a cow being pulled by the nose and the tail and the fucking lawyer sitting down and milking it for all it was worth, quite applicable here.

    Vote: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    muggins (1,816) Says:
    January 30th, 2013 at 5:18 pm

    I am sorry muggins, but this new case is not about the evidence, it will not get a mention. It is about the process that Judith Collins has gone through, and whether that is right. Your ‘evidence’ and your expert opinion will not get a mention.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    Judith (1,158) Says:

    January 30th, 2013 at 5:23 pm
    muggins (1,816) Says:
    January 30th, 2013 at 5:18 pm

    I am sorry muggins, but this new case is not about the evidence, it will not get a mention. It is about the process that Judith Collins has gone through, and whether that is right. Your ‘evidence’ and your expert opinion will not get a mention.

    Wanna bet?

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 35 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Unpopular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 48 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. peterwn (3,138 comments) says:

    They could also try and argue ‘Wednesbury’ unreasonableness – that the decision not to accept the Binnie report was so unreasonable that it should be overturned. See:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Associated_Provincial_Picture_Houses_v_Wednesbury_Corporation

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    One thing that will happen is that there will be more delays.
    And I reckon the government will be quite happy about that.
    And it isn’t costing the taxpayer anything at this stage.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 25 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Truthiz (185 comments) says:

    Bain and Karam are toast now,

    and then later we get to toast the few supporters … Woo hoo .. in your face Karam.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 56 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    Judith (1,159) Says:

    January 30th, 2013 at 5:23 pm
    muggins (1,816) Says:
    January 30th, 2013 at 5:18 pm

    I am sorry muggins, but this new case is not about the evidence, it will not get a mention. It is about the process that Judith Collins has gone through, and whether that is right. Your ‘evidence’ and your expert opinion will not get a mention.

    So you admit David Bain is a habitual liar, Judith?

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 45 Thumb down 40 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Unpopular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 51 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. Rowan (1,778 comments) says:

    Good on David and Joe, seeking this review, Judith Collins actions are beyond a joke, this is clearly not about closure for crown law more exoneration of the lousy investigation at the time, (am sure the ‘Daddy didn’t do it trolls will try to defend the conduct and investigation using the same old bull crap)
    The following extract seems to sum up the state of Judys actions rather well
    “The claim includes allegations that the Minister has breached David’s rights to natural justice, breached his rights under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, acted in bad faith, abused her power, and acted in a biased, unreasonable and predetermined manner,” Mr Karam said.”

    Truthiz, you are clearly deluded (again) have you ever thought you might be wrong for once in your life, or are you just that full of yourself?

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 260 Thumb down 199 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    muggins (1,819) Says:
    January 30th, 2013 at 5:30 pm
    Judith (1,159) Says:
    January 30th, 2013 at 5:23 pm
    I am sorry muggins, but this new case is not about the evidence, it will not get a mention. It is about the process that Judith Collins has gone through, and whether that is right. Your ‘evidence’ and your expert opinion will not get a mention.

    So you admit David Bain is a habitual liar, Judith?

    ——————

    Don’t try to be smart and clever Muggins. It does not fool the people that matter.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 689 Thumb down 512 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. Truthiz (185 comments) says:

    Never been more sure of myself,

    They should have quietly done a runner after that farce of trial in ChCh, but blowarse couldn’t stop himself,sooooo

    Its time to put them to the sword …..

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 67 Thumb down 26 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. tristanb (1,133 comments) says:

    Wouldn’t it be funny if one day David Bain just admitted it?

    If he got so sick and tired of all the legal stuff and just told the truth? I sometimes wonder if he wants to and that’s why Joe Karam won’t let him talk. But then I remember he’s an evil fucker who murdered his family in cold blood, and a lie isn’t going to weigh heavily on his (non-existent) conscience. It’s probably all he’s got in life at the moment too.

    Still if I was him, after I got my compensation, I’d leave for South America with my new found millions and then post a YouTube confession. (I’d also state that Joe Karam knew all along, just for the LULZ.)

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 79 Thumb down 22 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    Truthiz (127) Says:

    January 30th, 2013 at 5:40 pm
    Never been more sure of myself,

    They should have quietly done a runner after that farce of trial in ChCh, but blowarse couldn’t stop himself,sooooo

    Its time to put them to the sword …..

    Sure is, and Judith Collins is just the person to do it.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 62 Thumb down 15 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. thedavincimode (6,512 comments) says:

    Presumably, the need to establish bad faith on the part of Collins will necessitate judicial consideration of the Binnie report on the basis that any bad faith would in part be evidenced by her acting contrary to Justice Binnie’s high quality effort. Which, of course, it is not.

    So why would Karam want to risk a court decision coming to the inevitable conclusion that Binnie’s report is a crock of shite that no responsible cabinet could act upon?

    Or is it just about chargeable hours?

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 79 Thumb down 41 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Unpopular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 42 Thumb down 104 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    You sound so law abiding…..

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 55 Thumb down 14 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. Elaycee (4,285 comments) says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Unpopular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 111 Thumb down 144 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Don’t challenge yourself with the details davinci.
    At this point it’s about fair process something which Collins veered away from last September.
    I doubt it if is legally aided but it should be because it is of acute importance in how the state acts where no law prevails, or at least only quasi legal law prevails. It is also important as to NZ standing on human rights.
    As to you other point, it has already cost millions despite a very clear Judgement being written by the PC in 2007.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 168 Thumb down 117 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Unpopular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 55 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Unpopular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 47 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. thedavincimode (6,512 comments) says:

    Don’t challenge yourself with the details davinci

    Like Binnie you mean? Sorry, but I’m not interested in joining your fantasy club old thing.

    Tell you what I will be doing though. Ordering up large on the popcorn for when the High Court rules that Binnie is a fuckwit of the first order and that Collins had little choice but have it peer reviewed.

    What’s the betting they’ll try for a cheap deal? “Give us a coupla hundy and we’ll go away quietly.”

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 62 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Ryan Sproull (7,023 comments) says:

    In 13 minutes, Nostalgia’s comment has received 60 thumbs down.

    That’s about one thumbs down every 15 seconds.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. david@tokyo (262 comments) says:

    Enough of this whinger.

    Imagine the jump in the polls if John Key would grow a pair and just state categorically that Bain won’t get a cent more from the taxpayer because there’s simply insufficient proof that Bain was wrongly convicted?

    If Bain supporters would just set up a fund and those who feel he’s hard done by donate a dollar each, he’ll have done very nicely for a guy so convincingly framed for murder by his dead father.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 22 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. thedavincimode (6,512 comments) says:

    wow. 61 clicks in about 2 minutes. LOL (it wasn’t me, I couldn’t be fucked. I’ll be having my laff later when the High Court rules :))

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. thedavincimode (6,512 comments) says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Unpopular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 217 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. thedavincimode (6,512 comments) says:

    If Bain supporters would just set up a fund and those who feel he’s hard done by donate a dollar each, he’ll have done very nicely for a guy so convincingly framed for murder by his dead father.

    $5 is hardly going to re-launch his operatic career.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 90 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. orewa1 (428 comments) says:

    Bain and Collins deserve each other. They should be sent off to an isolated hut on the Chathams and told not to come back until they have agreed on a way forward.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    I told you not to challenge yourself with the details davinci.

    I doubt that the review, if it happens, will extend to the details of the report, but rather on how your dear Minister dealt with it. She’s been called out for the way she acted in ‘bad faith’ and so on as the pleadings say.

    JK has drifted off the ball, after starting off with Dotcom last year then not being pragmatic and dealing with this when he had the opportunity reflects on his leadership. Today the issue has become a lot bigger when it needed not do so. On the other hand we may yet get to see another birth ritual of The Bill of Rights.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. bhudson (4,734 comments) says:

    “The claim includes allegations that the Minister has breached David’s rights to natural justice, breached his rights under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, acted in bad faith, abused her power, and acted in a biased, unreasonable and predetermined manner,” Mr Karam said.”

    @Nostalgia-NZ,

    I see Karam is going with the ‘Dennis Denuto’ line of argument then – “It’s the vibe of the thing…”

    Does he plan to cite Mabo also?

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    If it happens? Surely they wouldn’t frivolously file a proceedings in the High Court and then pull out …..prematurely? ;)

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. wreck1080 (3,719 comments) says:

    Can they get away with this by using the bill of rights act? It seems to be a catch all for all injustices including late mail delivery.

    If this fails, maybe they’ll use some UN human rights policies? I can’t wait for Joris de bres to get going. That waste of space (the position, not him personally) needs to go.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. Truthiz (185 comments) says:

    Has to better than Karams Socrates rubbish … LOL

    and as for the Magna Carta, my gawd, you speak some bullsh*te, Nostalgia.

    Time for Cabinet to simply stand up and say NO compo, not one cent … :)

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 62 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. Psycho Milt (2,246 comments) says:

    Now we will discover if a citizen’s right are upheld by the Law…

    Shouldn’t be too difficult, given that David Bain doesn’t have a legal right to compensation.

    That said, Collins’ handling of this positively invites whichever judge looks at it to give her a good metaphorical kick up the arse. I can understand Collins being wildly fucked off at Binnie handing her such a crap report, but if you have pretensions to being a future Prime Minister you have to be able to handle shit like that without making a spectacle of yourself.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. thedavincimode (6,512 comments) says:

    Nostalgia

    Well, the legal beagles may have a different view on all of this. It’s always a steep mountain to climb to substantiate bad faith on the part of government officials. You are assuming that Collins acted in bad faith in part because she called bullshit on Binnie. The contrary view is that she would have been failing in her Ministerial responsibilities if she had endorsed his rooted report and the recommendation that exceeded the terms of reference. The fact that a former and very higly regarded High Court Judge endorsed her concerns about the scope and approach simply underscores that to act otherwise would have breached her Ministerial responsibilities, and that in itself I expect will torpedoe the case.

    This might just be the own goal of the year. It it will very amusing to see how things progress from here. It’s hard to imagine what on earth Karam was thinking, other than hoping it would create some leverage to at least chisel a coupla hundy. If that’s what this is about, he’s picked the wrong person. I’m expecting that this will disappear before the inevitable in a cloud of bullshit excuses.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 77 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. Ryan Sproull (7,023 comments) says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Unpopular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 141 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. Reid (15,904 comments) says:

    This application reeks of desperation – a last throw of the dice. They should just cut their losses whilst they’re behind.

    Unfortunately (for some) it’s the govt that is behind on this, and it has been ever since it turned from a legal into a political issue some years ago, as I have explained many times.

    What the govt is going to do is give him a settlement because if it doesn’t it will be political suicide, but it will be as miserly as it possibly imagines it can get away with. And this will be the worst of all worlds because it will open the door to the opposition who will almost certainly – at least the Gweens will – campaign on a policy of re-assessing the settlement.

    But that’s what it will do and guess why? Because a lot of (but not all) conservatives are against a settlement and we have seen the various reasons for that position enuciated ad infinitum in a handful of 4-5000 comment threads. So the govt has to keep them happy and while the govt’s “ideal” would be to deny settlement altogether, it can’t do that because it knows it would lose considerable public support. However the govt hasn’t worked out the numbers. Because while those who hold that view hallucinate there are heaps of like-minded people, in fact there aren’t. And the govt will find that out when it proceeds down the road I just outlined.

    Which just underlines how politically naive the Nats are. Liarbore would never have got itself into this position.

    Man, that hasn’t happened to me yet. Am I not making enough sense?

    There’s a bug where you can delete the cookie and vote again Ryan, that’s what those big numbers signify.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 33 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. bhudson (4,734 comments) says:

    The Davinci Whatever’s comment got 213 thumbs down in… how long?

    @Ryan Sproull,

    The feelings are strong in that one. [His] name is Legion: for [they] are many

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Unpopular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 175 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. Psycho Milt (2,246 comments) says:

    David Bain, does have a legal right to have the correct process followed though.

    So, what is the correct process for deciding whether to make an ex gratia payment?

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Ryan is happily bewildered.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Unpopular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 63 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. Psycho Milt (2,246 comments) says:

    The Cabinet could in fact have just said “No, you do not qualify – go away”.

    Or, “Why Simon Power Was Crap: number 315,856 in a series.”

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. Psycho Milt (2,246 comments) says:

    I think they are looking to stop the government from making a decision, until the correct process has been followed

    You still haven’t explained what you imagine “correct process” in a legally binding sense consists of when it comes to discretionary decisions.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. Steve (North Shore) (4,489 comments) says:

    None of the bullshit voting would have happened if you had to be logged in to vote.
    Kiwiblog has been visited and attacked by heaps of Trolls today – must be schoolteachers back on the job

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Unpopular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 228 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. bhudson (4,734 comments) says:

    The fact is she has a Privy Council decision, a Second Trial decision and now a very much respected QC, who have all agreed

    Really, Judith? Can you please cite the specific reference where the Privy Council stated that, in their judgement, he was ‘not guilty’?

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 52 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Unpopular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 67 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. thedavincimode (6,512 comments) says:

    Heh. 213 dislikes. A record?

    Better re-charge your mouse battery Nossie. :)

    Sproull

    Am I not making enough sense?

    Clearly not. Try harder.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    bhudson (3,158) Says:
    January 30th, 2013 at 7:31 pm

    Really, Judith? Can you please cite the specific reference where the Privy Council stated that, in their judgement, he was ‘not guilty’?

    Where did I say they said he was not guilty?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. thedavincimode (6,512 comments) says:

    Or, “Why Simon Power Was Crap: number 315,856 in a series.”

    I have to give you that Milt. Talk about leaving an old crab sandwich in the bottom drawer.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  70. bhudson (4,734 comments) says:

    Now for the process:

    You get a QC to do a report.

    In what process for the ex gratia payment of compensation does it state that i) a report must be commissioned, and ii) that is must be performed by a QC?

    therefore was advised to get it peer reviewed.

    Where in said same process does it state that a ‘peer review’ is mandatory if Cabinet deems to not take advice contained within a report they commission?

    without involving the applicant’s legal representation

    Where in said same process does it state that Cabinet (or the responsible Minister) must seek [additional] opinion of the applicant’s legal representation in the advice it requests?

    Unless she can show that she took advice from reputable sources, she can also be deemed to not have followed proper process.

    Where in said same process does it say that, having taken advice [report] which they can commission, that the responsible Minister , or Cabinet, must take further, external advice before taking a position – i.e. where in the process is it mandated that the Minister abrogate their decision [recommendation] to another party?

    As I noted above, this Judicial Review appears to have been made on the basis of “the vibe of the thing”

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  71. thedavincimode (6,512 comments) says:

    Now this is getting ridiculous. Judith up to 681 likes.

    I’m gunna buy some Logitech shares.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  72. bhudson (4,734 comments) says:

    Where did I say they said he was not guilty?

    Right about here:

    The fact is she has a Privy Council decision, a Second Trial decision and now a very much respected QC, who have all agreed

    The 2nd trial and Binnie reached a verdict/assessment of guilt or innocence (be it related to guilt beyond reasonable doubt, or innocence on the balance of probabilities.) The PC did no such thing.

    Neither the 2nd trial, nor Binnie were asked to reach any position on the verdict in the 1st trial.

    What is it you claim that all three agreed on?

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  73. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Unpopular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 97 You need to be logged in to vote
  74. Reid (15,904 comments) says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Unpopular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 77 You need to be logged in to vote
  75. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Unpopular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 58 You need to be logged in to vote
  76. Psycho Milt (2,246 comments) says:

    The fact is she has a Privy Council decision, a Second Trial decision and now a very much respected QC, who have all agreed.

    Agreed on what? Are we talking about something like agreeing that lattes and flat whites are for people who don’t drink coffee, or was it something relevant to Collins’ decision?

    She is going to be hard pushed to demonstrate she has dotted her i’s and crossed her t’s, if she expects to win this one. I happen to know she hasn’t.

    There you go again, mistaking the word “know” for things like “strongly believe,” “imagine,” “wish” etc. It really does have an actual meaning, I assure you. The question remains, what are the specifics of “due process” required for someone to reach a completely discretionary decision?

    Don’t get me wrong, I think Collins handled this really badly. The question is whether there was a legal process required to be followed that wasn’t, offering legal recourse to judicial review. Presumably Karam and Reed believe the BoR implies a process, otherwise their protege wouldn’t be offering himself up for further unpleasantness in the courts – but the bottom line is Cabinet can handle a discretionary decision any wants, up to and including “Nah, fuck ya.”

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  77. Jacob Cohen (44 comments) says:

    Bain should have just withdrawn the compensation claim and instead sued appropriate Government Departments over the first court case which was seen by the Privy Council to be a substantial miscarriage of justice and for which he did almost 13 years.
    That the Privy Council quashed his convictions and ordered a retrial surely has him most of the way there, without any major rehash of the evidence.

    “According to one of his friends, media commentator Paul Holmes, Karam was appalled at the way the family, the Police and the Fire Service arranged to burn the Bain house down.” There’s some good stuff there :-)

    Karam has made a fundamental mistake. Forget trying to have the whole of New Zealand love David.
    Quite a few still think he did it and won’t change their minds.
    Karam should have just gone for the money on whoever’s behalf.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  78. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Unpopular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 40 You need to be logged in to vote
  79. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Unpopular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 51 You need to be logged in to vote
  80. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Unpopular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 37 You need to be logged in to vote
  81. RF (1,259 comments) says:

    Bains last words… Glug Glug Glug joe we are sinking and fucked. The good ship Judith Collins has rammed us. I thought you brought the life jackets.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 47 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  82. Psycho Milt (2,246 comments) says:

    However before the final chapter in the legal saga was over, the Cabinet meanwhile had arbitrarily of its own volition decided to implement some Cabinet Guidelines for compensation for such people, obviously knowing that people like Bain, Tamihere and Watson will all, eventually, come under its jurisdiction.

    Are you seriously suggesting that Cabinet felt it had to put measures in place to block compensation claims from the likes of Bain and Tamihere when it had avoided having to pay compensation in a case of false imprisonment as overwhelmingly obvious as Peter Ellis’? If the govt could get away with not accepting Peter Ellis was falsely imprisoned and declining to compensate him for the utterly wanton destruction of his career, reputation and a fair proportion of his life, do you really imagine public perception requires them to pay wads of our cash to a guy who quite possibly murdered his family in cold blood?

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 55 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  83. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Unpopular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 57 You need to be logged in to vote
  84. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Unpopular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 61 You need to be logged in to vote
  85. Rowan (1,778 comments) says:

    For the twits who continually misrepresent the Privvy council findings

    For all these reasons, the Board concludes that, as asked by the
    appellant, the appeal should be allowed, the convictions quashed and a
    retrial ordered. The appellant must remain in custody meanwhile. The
    order of the Board for a retrial does not of course restrict the duty of the
    Crown to decide whether a retrial now would be in the public interest. As
    to that the Board has heard no submissions and expresses no opinion. The
    parties are invited to make written submissions on the costs of these
    proceedings within 2 1 days. In closing, the Board wishes to emphasise, as
    it hopes is clear, that its decision imports no view whatever on the proper
    outcome of a retrial. Where issues have not been fully and fairly
    considered by a trial jury, determination of guilt is not the task of
    appellate courts. The Board has concluded that, in the very unusual
    circumstances of this case, A SUBSTANTIAL MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE HAS
    ACTUALLY OCCURED. Therefore the proviso to section 3 85 ( 1 ) cannot be
    applied, and the appeal must under the subsection be allowed. At any
    retrial it will be decided whether the appellant is guilty or not, and
    nothing in this judgment should influence the verdict in any way.

    As many trolls on here can’t seem to grasp the capitalized sentance shall we give a very basic wikipedia definition

    A miscarriage of justice primarily is the conviction and punishment of a person for a crime they did not commit. The term can also apply to errors in the other direction—”errors of impunity”, and to civil cases. Most criminal justice systems have some means to overturn, or “quash”, a wrongful conviction, but this is often difficult to achieve. In some instances a wrongful conviction is not overturned for several years, or until after the innocent person has been executed, released from custody or died.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  86. Short Shriveled and Slightly to the Left (762 comments) says:

    Hey DPF did you realise that one can vote multiple times by simply refreshing? David’s 5 supporters discovered that a few hours ago

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 80 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  87. bhudson (4,734 comments) says:

    That is a requirement both of human rights and other legislation. It must always be fair and equitable.

    You seem to be missing the point on how an ex gratia payment is determined.

    To invite comment from the Police and Crown but not provide David Bain with the same, is not fair, and it is not equitable.

    The invited comments were related only to the criticisms made of them, not of the recommendation made by Binnie. That does not disadvantage Bain and is irrelevant from the perspective of the ‘grounds’ leveled for the JR.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  88. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/collins-defends-stance-bain-issues-legal-challenge-rh-135148#comment-603750

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  89. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Unpopular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 46 You need to be logged in to vote
  90. Psycho Milt (2,246 comments) says:

    …shall we give a very basic wikipedia definition

    A miscarriage of justice primarily is the conviction and punishment of a person for a crime they did not commit.

    Good thing the Privy Council doesn’t rely on Wikipedia for definitions, I guess…

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 128 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  91. Rowan (1,778 comments) says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Unpopular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 44 You need to be logged in to vote
  92. bhudson (4,734 comments) says:

    @N-NZ,

    The two parties… Well who else could they be? The determination by Cabinet, and process for advising Cabinet by the Minister, are not subject to the procedures of the Courts.

    You need to clutch at something more substantial than straws if you are to have a chance of being successful…

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  93. bhudson (4,734 comments) says:

    @Rowan,

    Your CAPS are trumped by the PC explicitly stating that they did not consider the question of guilt or innocence and made no representation on that.

    So who is misrepresenting?

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 48 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  94. bhudson (4,734 comments) says:

    pack up your tent and go home bhudson, you’re talking crap.

    Such an erudite argument N-NZ. Best you take some time to recover from such exertion…

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  95. Psycho Milt (2,246 comments) says:

    Where[sic] down to ‘quite possibly’ now are we?

    Unlike some of the more deranged commenters, I don’t pretend to certainty in this matter. To which we could add, my personal opinion on David Bain’s guilt or innocence is worth about as much as the compensation owed to Mr Bain, ie 0.

    This is like after the second Thomas trial…

    Yeah, uh, no. This isn’t in fact anything even remotely like the trial of a guy who was falsely imprisoned on the basis of criminal misconduct by the New Zealand Police.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  96. gamefisher (416 comments) says:

    The only problem I see in all this mess is Judith Collins and the present Gont are face with a challenged without any legal or any other type of presidence.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  97. corrigenda (142 comments) says:

    Nostalgia-NZ (2,695) Says:

    January 30th, 2013 at 7:49 pm
    The accusations made against her in the statement of claim expose a politician to scrutiny in what I think is an unprecedented way in NZ, and it is before the Courts, now.

    Can you please link us to the Statement of Claim?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  98. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Well bhudson isn’t showing much panic, over what could never happen. That’s reassuring.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  99. corrigenda (142 comments) says:

    Joe Karam is unable to back down now and the media is turning against him. Arthur A Thomas never refused a media interview, WHY NOT DAVID?

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 148 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  100. Rowan (1,778 comments) says:

    B Hudson @ 8.45
    Nice try, you offering your ‘spin’?
    The PC offered their views, and gave us their ‘opinion’ but they left it up to NZ law to decide whether or not to retry, I suppose you have the same narrow view as some of twits on here that the PC acually ‘thought he was guilty’ but just decided to create a scandal for NZ law.
    Tell me what does a ‘substantial MOJ’ mean to you?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  101. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Short Shriveled and Slightly to the Left (714) Says:
    January 30th, 2013 at 8:34 pm
    Hey DPF did you realise that one can vote multiple times by simply refreshing? David’s 5 supporters discovered that a few hours ago

    ———————

    Actually, as one of the ‘five’ I presume you are talking about, I informed David of the fact that multiple voting was possible the day he put the voting system on his blog. However, as you will note, no one used it until it was discovered by other people and discussed on the General Thread. Since then everyone seems to have got in on the act.

    David is very aware of the problem and has been working on it. I”m sure he will sort it out soon.

    You don’t need to refresh either. :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  102. Jacob Cohen (44 comments) says:

    @ bhudson and Rowan
    Did a substantial miscarriage of justice occur or not?
    Was the Privy Council right or wrong in just that alone?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  103. bhudson (4,734 comments) says:

    Nice try, you offering your ‘spin’?

    @Rowan,

    No, just pointing out what the PC actually stated. (That being quite different from what you claim)

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  104. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    Binnie explains Discombobulation

    Robin didn’t pee before the killing spree, piss his pants strangling Stephen, visit the lavatory during his clean up.

    Robin changed his bloodied clothes (forgot underpants) before he shot himself but barely washed his hands, because they had little or no blood on them when found.

    Robin forgot to leave a suicide letter explaining himself, typing instead an immature message on the computer praising the son who habitually locked him out of the lounge/computer alcove.

    Robin didn’t grasp the muzzle (suppressor) to guide the rifle (accurately) to his temple, in order not disturb Stephen’s pristine prints, but left no prints on the rifle anywhere. He got spatter from the head wound on his left index fingernail that was supposedly near the trigger.

    Robin, now dead, realised he wasn’t going to fall with his hand outstretched near where he had placed the magazine on its edge, under the table a metre from the beanbag, so he discombobulated over to make it look like suicide.

    ========

    Cabinet combobulates

    Robin was shot dead as he entered the computer alcove, his body lifted up under the shoulders, so spilling blood onto the curtains, and dragged over and dumped on the beanbag to make it look he shot himself there. The spare magazine was placed on its edge a few millimetres from his outstretched hand. The probability of it falling that way is 0 and the rifle was also placed unconvincingly. So while the police initially thought it was suicide they very soon realised it was murder.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 101 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  105. Nookin (3,031 comments) says:

    KANZ @ 8.02
    “Who was it wanted the ‘process” explained?
    You will find it all here in the Cabinet Guidelines.
    I notice that nowhere does it say the Minister is to get the report furnished peer reviewed.”

    I also note that there is nothing in the guidelines to suggest that they apply to David Bain.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  106. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    A miscarriage of justice is just really a term, that indicates whatever has occurred in a particular case, has deviated or departed from the normal rules in which all normal judicial procedures are conducted by. Therefore it what happened was not a proper judicial procedure and as such, cannot exist as one. So it is cancelled, for want of a better word.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  107. Rowan (1,778 comments) says:

    Pyscho Milt
    Good at misrepresenting what I say aren’t you! the argument about the Thomas case was a comparison on being probably innocent but possibily guilty as you can’t prove BRD. It would be good if some of your ‘twisted sisters’ acknowledged your view (that our personal opinions of guilt or innocence is irrelevant) but they are somewhat deluded into thinking that the court of public opinion will decide the outcome of the compensation claim.
    Deny misconduct all you want, criminal or not but the fact is this case is such a controversial “whodunnit” is because of the actions of the cops at the time whether deliberate or ineptitude. I suppose it helps to have investigations such as the police covering arse authority to reinforce your denial.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  108. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Unpopular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 80 You need to be logged in to vote
  109. Rowan (1,778 comments) says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Unpopular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 55 You need to be logged in to vote
  110. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Rowan (495) Says:
    January 30th, 2013 at 9:11 pm

    What makes the success of the pending Court case more probable, is the fact that the police – who were fundamental in the establishment of the the extraordinary circumstances, which allowed the bid to be accepted in the first place – are partially responsible for the claim of the process not being equitable. In that I mean, because the police were given the report and were allowed to make comment, and the defense excluded from that process, gives the case a strong foundation for the claims it makes because the Police can be, and even admitted (Doyle) to many of the errors made or actions they failed to take.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  111. Nookin (3,031 comments) says:

    Judith
    I think you are suggesting that it is a nullity and therefore has no effect. If an order is made then it does have effect until a court declares otherwise. You are sort of on track, though.

    Your problem is that the same allegations are being made about the Binnie report. He is said not to have followed the procedures.

    MOJ goes a bit beyond process, however. MOJ is the threshold that needs to be met before an appeal is likely to succeed.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  112. Rex Widerstrom (5,253 comments) says:

    Getting waaaaay back to the original topic of the post… if someone meets the requisite tests in terms of income and assets to qualify for Legal Aid then they get Legal Aid. Is DPF channelling Collins? Will Legal Aid be restricted only to recipients and actions which meet with the approval of the Minister of Justice? Good luck with that when Labour eventually get back in.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  113. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Unpopular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 37 You need to be logged in to vote
  114. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    This is a desperate act by desperate men
    They know Bain has no chance of getting compensation if another report is commissioned, so they are trying to get Binnie’s flawed report back on the table.
    Good luck with that.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 167 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  115. Nookin (3,031 comments) says:

    Jacob

    A substantial miscarriage of justice occurred in the sense that the jury did not get to hear evidence that could have changed the outcome. The jury still had to hear the evidence, decide whether to accept it and then put it all into the mixer. PC very clearly steered clear of commenting on the veracity of the evidence and whether it should (as opposed to could) lead to a different outcome.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  116. Short Shriveled and Slightly to the Left (762 comments) says:

    You’re sounding a little guilty there Rowan…… it happened to be comments around your first comment that were targeted…… if I was a betting man, and I am, I’d be punting on you

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  117. gamefisher (416 comments) says:

    muggins re 9:27

    Ditto

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  118. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    You’ve got the interpretation of the PC decision wrong Nookin, they did say the new evidence could lead to a different outcome. But we are beyond there now because their judgement proved to be true.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  119. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    muggins (1,823) Says:
    January 30th, 2013 at 9:27 pm
    ——————————-
    This court case is not challenging the compensation decision, it is challenging the process that Judith Collins has taken.

    Basically what it is asking for is that an equitable process be undertaken. To date, the process can be demonstrated to have not followed a fair process and therefore, any decision resulting from is can be challenged as unjust (by either side)

    I said weeks ago, that Collins had made the process unsafe by her actions.

    This case will have no effect on the compensation claim except that if successful, the government will have to follow an equitable process and be able to demonstrate that in any decision they make.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  120. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10817417

    And if David Bain had not exersised his right to silence he would have almost certainly been found guilty.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  121. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Welcome the idiots.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  122. Dexter (271 comments) says:

    He should just be thankful that he hasn’t formally made it to the very small group of double or more killers we have in this country.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  123. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    Nookin (2,366) Says:

    January 30th, 2013 at 9:27 pm
    Jacob

    A substantial miscarriage of justice occurred in the sense that the jury did not get to hear evidence that could have changed the outcome. The jury still had to hear the evidence, decide whether to accept it and then put it all into the mixer. PC very clearly steered clear of commenting on the veracity of the evidence and whether it should (as opposed to could) lead to a different outcome.

    That’s it in a nutshell, Nookin.
    And with the new evidence against David Bain, if he hadn’t exersised his right to silence he would have almost certainly be found guilty. Any half competent prosecutor would have opened him up like a can of worms.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  124. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Give the idiot a phone card.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  125. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Rex Widerstrom (4,927) Says:
    January 30th, 2013 at 9:24 pm

    Excellent point Rex. If David Bain qualifies for legal aid, then he should be entitled to it, as of right.
    Regardless of public opinion or anything else, the law currently defines who and what it is available for.

    If David Bain has been prevented from receiving legal aid, and that can be proven to have been influenced by the same person who is named in the this current action, then that will merely strengthen the action, because such treatment interferes with the process which is clearly not equitable.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  126. Snarkle (118 comments) says:

    Question: will DB have to testify at any stage?

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  127. Psycho Milt (2,246 comments) says:

    …but the fact is this case is such a controversial “whodunnit” is because of the actions of the cops at the time whether deliberate or ineptitude.

    Ah, another of those “facts” that brutalise the meaning of the word fact. This case involved circumstantial evidence and would have even if the Police had followed the Karam Guide to Criminal Investigation to the letter (which would have been difficult as some of it’s contradictory). So far since I’ve taken an interest in the case (which can’t be much over 6 weeks), there have been thousands upon thousands of comments on Kiwiblog indicating that people do not find circumstantial evidence conclusive. You’re indulging in wishful thinking.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  128. BlairM (2,286 comments) says:

    There’s no way this will be successful. Justice Binnie’s report was extrajudicial. Legally speaking it was contracted advice on Cabinet using its powers of discretion.

    If Bain is successful, it would set a precedent that Ministers could be sued for not following the advice of their civil servants. I don’t think the Court is going to have a bar of it.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  129. Rowan (1,778 comments) says:

    Short Shrivelled
    Bet what you want short shrivelled, I don’t have to resort to such tactics but by all means vote as many dislikes on my posts as you want.

    Muggins
    The desperate old bean around here is you, I don’t see anyone else on this blog who trolls as much bs, demonstrated lies and wild speculation from their arse as you or that has to pretend that they are ringing crown witnesses for ‘inside information’ Somehow you think that your ‘opinion’ is going to make a difference to the outcome here, but as you have continually demonstrated you are just a twisted deluded individual. Now that Dottie has gone you have another achievement being the biggest nutcase here! congratulations

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  130. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Snarkle (32) Says:
    January 30th, 2013 at 9:44 pm

    I doubt Collins will even testify or make an appearance. This will be a battle between the men (or women) in black gowns and funny wigs

    It will actually be quite an event. There are many within the legal profession that are not impressed with Collins or Fisher. The advice to Bain will be very ‘rich’. Collins will have one hell of a fight on her hands if the case is heard.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  131. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Will the dickheads from CS and JFRB have to testify at any stage, or produce their pm reports and photos of injuries or will they just get to stay in goo ga land.

    I know the answer to that.

    What would never happen, happened today. What a shock.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  132. Reid (15,904 comments) says:

    Look at all the mentals going nuts over the karma on this thread.

    Baying at the moon productions.

    I don’t think the Court is going to have a bar of it.

    It would if Sian thought she could get away with it. Hard to make a common law rule that applies only when the hated tories are in power though, even if you are the head of the SC.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  133. Snarkle (118 comments) says:

    Well, one thing is for sure. We can all stop worry about due process now, because it is going to be very carefully examined from all sides. Perhaps we can now all just get a life. For the rest, remember the Chinese proverb “even a dragon can appear once too often”.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  134. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Get use to it Blairm, Government and Ministers are accountable.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  135. bhudson (4,734 comments) says:

    What would never happen, happened today. What a shock.

    Was the request for a Judicial Review accepted today. Blazingly quick. That would be a shock!

    Or was one merely requested? Which is of no great surprise to anyone.

    If you spin too fast, you’ll get dizzy, fall down and do yourself an injury N-NZ

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 13 You need to be logged in to vote
  136. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    BlairM (1,904) Says:
    January 30th, 2013 at 9:50 pm
    There’s no way this will be successful. Justice Binnie’s report was extrajudicial. Legally speaking it was contracted advice on Cabinet using its powers of discretion.

    If Bain is successful, it would set a precedent that Ministers could be sued for not following the advice of their civil servants. I don’t think the Court is going to have a bar of it.

    ——————————-
    The government can be sued, and has been on many occasions for its decision that are extrajudicial.
    The government is bound to following a fair and equitable process in such matters. When it hasn’t done so before, it has been successfully challenged. It makes no difference that there is no legislation regarding this particular issue.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 19 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  137. krazykiwi (9,189 comments) says:

    This topic is a cesspit. What a total and utter waste of energy, thought, and passion.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  138. bhudson (4,734 comments) says:

    The government can be sued, and has been on many occasions for its decision that are extrajudicial.

    Fascinating. Can we have an example please?

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 14 You need to be logged in to vote
  139. Snarkle (118 comments) says:

    Why don’t we just wait for the result of the judicial review? Some of the finest legal minds will be considering it, etc. Or is that an oxymoron?

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  140. Rowan (1,778 comments) says:

    Psycho
    I know what circumstantial evidence is, you don’t seem to realise the difference between strong circumstantial evidence and weak inferences (which is about the subtotal of the arguments against David here)

    “This case involved circumstantial evidence and would have even if the Police had followed the Karam Guide to Criminal Investigation to the letter”
    Do you really think this case would have been difficult had it been undertaken with an open mind and done any of the 12 things Rodney suggested in the latest NBR been done? we would not be discussing the issue here 18.5 years later if the cops hadn’t decided what happened, ignored anything that didn’t support the conclusion, destroyed vital evidence without testing it and they only needed to ‘prove it’ Seems that winning the case was much more important than establishing the truth which is what has happened again and again in high profile cases in NZ i.e. Watson, Thomas, Ellis etc

    http://m.nbr.co.nz/article/twelve-reasons-worry-about-bain-case-lf-134942

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  141. V (668 comments) says:

    If he wants money maybe he could just focus on the movies, there could be lots of sequels:

    David Bain in “The Paper Round”.
    David & Robin
    David & Robin Returns
    David Forever
    Bain Begins
    Weekend at David’s
    David Bain in Die Hard
    The Bain Redemption
    The Famous Five:Rise of the Phantom Typer
    David & Karam:A Love Story
    David in Wonderland
    David Bain: Coming to a Chch Street near you.
    David Bain in No Recall
    Saving Private Bain
    The Bain Departed
    Fully Striped Jersey
    Lock, Stock and two Smoking Bains
    Bainspotting
    There will be Blood (Animal only)
    Confessions of David Bain
    The Princess Juror
    A Fistful of Legal Aid
    All Quiet on the Paperround
    Bain man

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 21 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  142. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    This shows Karam knows David is innocent in the same way many people know Jesus was the Son of God.

    This gift may not be shared by all dispassionate and rational people.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  143. Rowan (1,778 comments) says:

    B Hudson @ 9.02
    I understand, the PC thought he was ‘guilty’ but just decided that they would create a scandal for NZ law by quashing the conviction, didn’t you know thats how they work! What did they do with Barlows latest appeal again? using your reverse logic they probably thought he was innocent!
    really this the best you can do? LMAO

    Jacob @ 9.00
    Yes the PC did decide that a MOJ had occured but as you may notice from the posts of some of the deluded twits here that the PC just ‘decided’ to create a scandal for NZ law and they actually ‘believed’ him guilty. Or so some of the ‘daddy didn’t do it’ nutters here would have you believe!

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  144. bhudson (4,734 comments) says:

    @Rowan,

    I didn’t say that. What I pointed put was that the PC did not consider the question of his guilt or innocence and made no representation on that.

    To suggest that means I said the PC thought he was guilty is sub-infantile.

    You do yourself, and your cause, no favours

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  145. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    http://m.nbr.co.nz/article/twelve-reasons-worry-about-bain-case-lf-134942

    Looks like we are to expect even more murders so the Police had better lift their game.

    Perhaps the Police could consult, you know ex thieves telling the police what to look for on the other side of the equation, as an example. You know Fox turned game keeper.

    Bit hard to be an ex murderer I guess. Bit hard to get employment. A bit different I would imagine if, as in this case there is a split decision. David is lucky he has that support, many others don’t.

    So murderers can assist the police with their enquiries into other murderers and murders, brilliant, so simple. Employed ;)

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  146. Truthiz (185 comments) says:

    Lol

    What fun happens when we go out for a spin …

    the little trolls, Judith/Ginny/Allison/Cybernana and B Ronnie Mac and Rowan leapt to the defence of the undefensible bain, poor davey he never thought this would go so badly … No, Joe you promised we would win and get rich and EVERYONE would love me …

    Please please please, just leave me alone he cries, but its his boss the blowarse that is really running his show and he is not gonna let davey go and the truth iz money, Eh Joe, thats what its really all about, tell us some more stories of Socrates being hung and how large a 2mm blood spot is, you d fk.

    Strange I’m starting to feel sorry for davey, drawn into this ego testicle nightmare … lol,

    .
    nah, … fk them all and send those lying bastards both to hell ………….. :)

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 20 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  147. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    ‘bhudson (3,168) Says:
    January 30th, 2013 at 9:57 pm
    What would never happen, happened today. What a shock.

    Was the request for a Judicial Review accepted today. Blazingly quick. That would be a shock!

    Or was one merely requested? Which is of no great surprise to anyone.

    If you spin too fast, you’ll get dizzy, fall down and do yourself an injury N-NZ’

    How’s that foot fit in your mouth?

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  148. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Late night meltdowns by the old crows, how unexpected. New progress result for the twisted sisters 0.00000%

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  149. Colville (2,056 comments) says:

    sheesh 149 comments already….

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  150. Psycho Milt (2,246 comments) says:

    Do you really think this case would have been difficult had it been undertaken with an open mind and done any of the 12 things Rodney suggested in the latest NBR been done.

    Yes, I do. For one thing, some of that list is Karam bullshit rather than actual Police failures, for another there was no conclusive evidence to find either way, and last but very much not least, the partisans on both sides have proven impervious to reason on the subject.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  151. Nookin (3,031 comments) says:

    NostalgiaNZ

    My interpretation is correct PC said the evidence “could” produce a different outcome. It did not say “should” have produced a different outcome.

    Fisher says that had Binnie adopted the appropriate rules for viewing circumstantial evidence he could, but not necessarily would, have come to a different outcome.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  152. Psycho Milt (2,246 comments) says:

    Also this:

    I know what circumstantial evidence is, you don’t seem to realise the difference between strong circumstantial evidence and weak inferences (which is about the subtotal of the arguments against David here)

    You keep saying you know what circumstantial evidence is and then immediately demonstrating that you don’t know what it is. Circumstantial evidence is evidence about which you must make “inferences.” It’s the only kind of evidence on offer in this case.

    More to the point, what exactly does the police approach to evidence in the Bain case have to do with the topic of the thread?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  153. Nookin (3,031 comments) says:

    Here is the section of NZBORA on which Karam appears to rely

    “Right to justice
    (1) Every person has the right to the observance of the principles of natural justice by any tribunal or other public authority which has the power to make a determination in respect of that person’s rights, obligations, or interests protected or recognised by law.
    (2) Every person whose rights, obligations, or interests protected or recognised by law have been affected by a determination of any tribunal or other public authority has the right to apply, in accordance with law, for judicial review of that determination.
    (3) Every person has the right to bring civil proceedings against, and to defend civil proceedings brought by, the Crown, and to have those proceedings heard, according to law, in the same way as civil proceedings between individuals.”

    Subsection 1 is probably the critical ss. Is cabinet making a determination in respect of Bain’s rights, obligations, or interests protected by law? At first sight, one would have to say that receipt of an ex gratia payment is not protected by law. He may be able to mount an argument on this but it does seem problematical. I earlier expressed the view that he would probably have to establish bad faith and this seems to be one of his planks. He may have an argument on predetermination but would have to show that it was implacable.

    Much may turn on how the HC views the standing of the Binnie report. Is it simply advice commissioned and received by the government and which the government is free to accept, reject or question or is it more of an adjudicative document in the sense that Bain and Power agreed to let a third party make the decision and both would be bound? Or is it somewhere in between? I cannot see how it can be an adjudicative document which will not help Bain. The rules of natural justice would apply if this was some form of arbitration but it clearly wasn’t. The Cabinet Guidelines (to the extent that they may be relevant) view the report as advice to the government. The guideline do not contemplate that Bain would have rights in the process of formulating that advice. Those rights may have been conferred by agreement, however. Then, the question is”are gratuitous rights enforceable?’

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  154. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Nookin (2,368) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 6:25 am
    NostalgiaNZ

    My interpretation is correct PC said the evidence “could” produce a different outcome. It did not say “should” have produced a different outcome.

    Fisher says that had Binnie adopted the appropriate rules for viewing circumstantial evidence he could, but not necessarily would, have come to a different outcome.’

    I don’t recall ever saying ‘should.’ If I did it was a mistake, the test for the PC always would only be ‘could.’

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  155. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    The government ‘gave’ themselves the right to make decisions about compensation Nookin, that didn’t include any element to allow unfairness or breach of natural justice. They said we’ll do the job fairly, in the Bain case there is a suggestion they ‘contracted’ that Bain would accept the result no matter the result. Power’s letter clearly states who the parties are. Collins has got herself a big headache.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  156. barry (1,317 comments) says:

    So Binnie was asked to decide on compensation FOR WRONGFUL IMPRSIONMENT ETC.

    Nothing about guilt. I think Binnie got it right.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  157. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Nookin (2,368) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 6:25 am

    Fisher says that had Binnie adopted the appropriate rules for viewing circumstantial evidence he could, but not necessarily would, have come to a different outcome.
    ———————————-

    Fisher is just one opinion on those ‘rules’, other more experienced legal professionals have disagreed with him.
    Who knows who is right.

    But the basic premise of our legal system is that a person is innocent until proven guilty.
    The manner in which any information is and should be regarded is from that stance.

    David Bain was required to demonstrate the he was either innocent, beyond reasonable doubt, and if not able to do that, that he was innocent, on the balance of probabilities and that extra-ordinary circumstances existed.

    Therefore, David’s team puts forward their argument. Obviously they did not prove the first measure, so the second applied. There can be no arguing that there were no extra-ordinary circumstances. The burning of the house, the failure to adhere to the manual, Weir’s changed testimony etc, are all examples of that, which exist in fact, not opinion, and therefore prove that part.

    The questionable part comes to the innocence of balance of probabilities. Binnie appears to have based his questioning on that basic premise, of innocence until proven otherwise. An issue is raised by either the defense or the Crown, Binnie looks at the existing evidence, then asked questions of the Crown witnesses and David. If by doing that, he does not receive a definitive answer as to prove innocence or guilt, then he applies a measure of what are the probabilities.

    e.g. David said no one knew where the key was. The police agree, except the police had no way of knowing if that was true or not. However, the spent shells in the caravan indicate that Robin had used the gun and therefore could have known that, along with the fact he shared a room with David for storage, and the key was not well hidden, but merely in a container on top of the cabinet. Obviously then, the probability that Robin knew where the key was, is high. The Crown failed to provide evidence that would dissolve that basic premise of innocent.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  158. Nookin (3,031 comments) says:

    “in the Bain case there is a suggestion they ‘contracted’ that Bain would accept the result no matter the result.”

    I have acknowledged that this is one of the interpretations that the Court could put on the situation and if there was an adjudicative element (to the extent this this was an arbitration) then the rule of natural justice apply. Bain will need to show more than just a suggestion, however.

    Judith
    But the basic premise of our legal system is that a person is innocent until proven guilty.
    The manner in which any information is and should be regarded is from that stance.”

    In criminal law, yes you are right but this is not a criminal prosecution. This is a case of someone (Bain) wanting something (money) belonging to someone else (the taxpayer) and the basic element of our legal system is that if you want something belonging to someone else then you have to prove a right to it. Now, reconcile those principles. Cue Reid and cognitive disonance.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  159. Jacob Cohen (44 comments) says:

    David was convicted in the first trial and did nearly 13 years of a ‘life’ sentence.
    The highest authority available to the New Zealand legal system, the Privy Council, then quashed that conviction.

    The second trial was held and gave 5 ‘Not Guilty’ verdicts – not proven innocent, but also insufficient evidence to convince the jury of his guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

    David is surely entitled to compensation for nearly 13 years of jail-time, probably plus some damages.

    Having seemingly taken over David’s life him, the mistake Karam has made is not suing appropriate Government departments for compensation, rather than appealing to Cabinet with this matter falling outside of Cabinet ‘rules’ and subject to their discretion.

    Karam should have sought a court ruling on technical matters rather than a system that re-examines all the evidence, particularly as the second court case gave verdicts on that. This current Cabinet process is basically a third trial, which if it does not provide the compensation sought, will indicate David Bain was most probably the killer after all.

    Note for those who usually annihilate the ‘messenger’ – I don’t give my opinion on whether I think Bain innocent or not. I just don’t understand why Karam didn’t go the simpler route.

    Nookin – This is a case of someone (Bain) wanting something (money) belonging to someone else (the taxpayer) and the basic element of our legal system is that if you want something belonging to someone else then you have to prove a right to it.

    Why not – This is a case of someone (Bain) wanting something (money) belonging to someone else (the taxpayer) because he had lost something (nearly 13 years of his life) in an unsafe trial, when a second accepted trial set him free. The basic element of our legal system should be that if the Government (justice system) wrongly takes something from a citizen, it should give it (or compensation) back.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  160. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Nookin (2,369) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 8:04 am
    ———————–

    That premise is not just in criminal law, in underlines our entire system, including all state matters. Whilst this matter is not legislated, it is still the point from which all disputes must be handled by authorities (in theory, of course we know it is not the case in reality). Even in civil matters the case ‘must be proved’. That is the wrong doing established.

    Bain does not want something that belongs to somebody else. He wants to be compensated for wrongful imprisonment and collect what is rightfully his according to the prescribed guidelines. If those guidelines did not exist, he could have simply sued the government for his ‘loss of freedom’.

    Bain does not have to prove he was wrongfully imprisoned. That was decided by the Privy Councils decision when the crime he was serving a sentence of imprisonment, ceased to exist. At that point the slate was wiped clean as such. A subsequent trial found him not guilty, which reinforces the claim that the term of imprisonment was wrong. All he has to prove is that he meets the criteria defined by the Cabinet (which must by law be fair and equitable, despite it not having its own legislation)

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  161. RRM (9,414 comments) says:

    A scene from the forthcoming new movie Being David Bain, Written, directed, produced by, and starring David Bain:

    Bain Bain Bain.

    Bain Bain?

    Bain!

    Bain Bain?

    Bain Bain Bain; Bain!!

    Bain Bain Bain -
    – Bain Bain Bain Bain Bain.

    Bain Bain.

    Bain Bain.

    Bain Bain Bain Bain

    Bain Bain Bain Bain

    Bain Bain Bain Bain Bain Bain Bain Bain Bain Bain Bain Bain

    Bain Bain Bain Bain Bain Bain Bain Bain Bain Bain Bain Bain

    Bain Bain Bain Bain

    Bain Bain

    Bain Bain Bain Bain

    Bain Bain Bain Bain, Bain, Bainnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn

    Bain Bain Bain Bain!

    :roll:

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  162. Nookin (3,031 comments) says:

    “Bain does not want something that belongs to somebody else”

    Yes he does. The money that he wants belongs to the government. He asserts a “right” to it. He has to prove that “right”. He cannot because it does not exist. Cabinet has volunteered parameters within which it might volunteer compensation entirely at cabinet’s discretion. The threshold is proof of innocence. Without those guidelines Bain could not sue. There has been not wrongful imprisonment or malicious prosecution giving rise to an action in tort.

    “Bain does not have to prove he was wrongfully imprisoned. That was decided by the Privy Councils decision when the crime he was serving a sentence of imprisonment, ceased to exist.”

    Yes he does. What is more, his whole case involves an acceptance of that premise. He agreed to the “terms of reference” if I can loosely refer to Binnie’s brief as such. The conviction may have been quashed but it remained a legally enforceable conviction until it was set aside. That is why he remained in prison and why the department of corrections cannot be sued.

    Jacob

    You say “why not?”. Simply because the law does not provide a remedy. No, I will go further. The law says that Bain was not wronged to the extent that he has a right of action against the crown and he has no rights to receive compensation. Don’t get confused between what the law is and what you think it should be.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  163. Truthiz (185 comments) says:

    Please please please Joe, let me go

    I no longer want to be part of your show ………

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  164. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    I see the headline on the front page of the Dompost this morning reads

    Collins defiant as Bain seeks review.

    Oh dear. I reckon there would be nothing worse that a defiant Collins. Hope Davey boy can stand the heat.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  165. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Nookin (2,371) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 9:10 am

    That is why he remained in prison and why the department of corrections cannot be sued.
    ——————–
    He remained in prison only until the ‘paper work’ was done that firstly dissolved the conviction that put him there, and a Court decision put him on bail for the charges against him.

    He did not remain in prison because he was still considered in law, guilty of any crime, as you imply. The Privy Council’s statement that he remains in custody in the meantime, is a ‘housekeeping’ requirement. The doors can not simply be held open until the correct procedure is followed.

    I disagree with you on your first point. Wrongful imprisonment was proven by the Privy Council’s decision, because you cannot imprison a person where there is no conviction, and at the point of the conviction being quashed and a miscarriage of justice declared, the judicial process that lead to that conviction, ceased to exist. When the judicial process does not exist, then the result of it, doesn’t either. Therefore, David Bain had served 13 years wrongfully imprisoned.

    There is no law that ‘entitles’ him to compensation, however, there are many means by which he can claim ‘damages’, compensation process as prescribed by the cabinet guidelines being just one of them.

    The Department of Corrections can be sued, and have been sued and are in the process of being sued in other matters. They cannot be sued in this matter because the Privy Council instructed he be kept in custody in the meantime, a normal housekeeping procedure, regarding the existing charges.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  166. Nookin (3,031 comments) says:

    Judith
    He was lawfully detained from the time of his arrest until his release. Even the PC directed that he be held in custody. If he was lawfully detained then he cannot sue for wrongul imprisonment. Please do not confuse a quashed conviction with the ingredients of the actionable tort known as “wrongful imprisonment”. Yes, the PC said that the conviction was wrong but that does not per se amount to an actionable wrong. If he can sue on other grounds, what are they and why has he put all his eggs in the Guidelines basket? The Guidelines exist because there are no other grounds and Bain, Karam, et al know that. That is why they are relying on cabinet’s discretion and not a defined legal right to compensation. The conviction remained in place till it was quashed. He was for that time guilty as charged.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  167. bhudson (4,734 comments) says:

    I see Karam is in the news again with the judicial review request.

    saying Justice Minister Judith Collins had abused her power, breached his rights to natural justice, acted in bad faith and acted in a “biased and unreasonable manner”.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/8245040/Bain-deliberately-left-out-of-review-proceedings

    Or, in other words:

    “In summing up, it’s the Constitution, it’s Mabo, it’s justice, it’s law, it’s the vibe, and, uh … No, that’s it.
    It’s the vibe.”

    I wonder what he’s like with photocopiers…

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  168. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    The problem we have is not the compensation. The problem is how can a man who almost certainly, based on a mass of evidence, be found not guilty? What went wrong?

    I suggest our lawyer-serving system is nothing more than an anachronistic circus. We need fundamental changes which won’t happen because the adversarial system is a gold mine. Winning matters, not truth.

    Despite what clever lawyers like Pyscho Milt say, any panel of scientists would come to the conclusion I did: The likelihood Robin killed himself approaches zero. Do lawyers have a menu when they have dinners? How do they manage to chose?

    The list is a mile long but here’s enough to convict 10 times:

    1. Normal overnight urine load despite fighting Stephen to the death and washing up.
    2. Blood spot on left index fingernail (supposed trigger hand).
    3. The lack of Robin’s prints on the rifle despite it taking other prints.
    4. Stephen’s pristine prints on suppressor not smudged where Robin would have grasped it.
    5. The difficult temple shot not mouth shot lying on the sofa or beanbag.
    6. The changing into old clothes without underpants to meet God.
    7. The location and orientation of the spare magazine on its edge.
    8. The location of body away from where he died.
    9. If he were escaping the “incest”, why not just kill himself? Why kill others? Why leave the son who locked him out of the lounge/computer alcove?
    10. No written explanation, only a pathetic “suicide” “message” praising this son.

    This demand to pay compensation to protect the integrity of the system is the equivalent of:
    THE OPERATION WAS A GREAT SUCCESS BUT THE PATIENT DIED.

    Maybe this absolute travesty of justice will mobilise enough people to demand changes. For a start, the “not proven” verdict should be made available TOMORROW.

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  169. Psycho Milt (2,246 comments) says:

    …Justice Minister Judith Collins had abused her power, breached his rights to natural justice, acted in bad faith and acted in a “biased and unreasonable manner”.

    If only you could sue govt ministers for acting in a a “biased and unreasonable manner.” The pricks would be spending so much time in court they’d hardly be able to damage the country at all…

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  170. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    I agree that this is a delaying tactic by Karam et al. Karam surely must be worried at the lies that David told Binnie and the fact those lies have been exposed. The trouble is, the longer this process takes, the more and more people who will think that David really did murder his family. Karam and Bain seem to be comfortable with that.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  171. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    Ms Collins warns that legal action would only add to delays on the application.
    Oh dear.

    Mind you, that doesn’t really matter because David Bain has Buckley’s chance of getting any compensation anyway.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  172. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Nookin (2,372) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 9:51 am
    ———————–

    Sorry but he was wrongfully imprisoned, because the judicial process that enabled his imprisonment was deemed to be to have not happened. Because the process was incorrect, the result was incorrect. He was imprisoned by a judicial process that effectively when declared a miscarriage of justice, ceased to exist. Therefore, he was not a guilty man or had ever been a guilty man. Therefore his imprisonment was wrong – wrongfully imprisoned.

    The miscarriage of justice does not say, “well he was guilty and not he is not” It says he was never guilty in the first place, effectively what happened didn’t happen, because the judicial process that ‘appeared to make it happen’ wasn’t a judicial process, and the conviction doesn’t exist and never did because of that.

    I realise it is a difficult concept to explain. But the miscarriage of justice doesn’t just say, ‘ok this shouldn’t have happened, so lets get it right’, it basically says, ‘this didn’t happen’ because for it to have happened, a judicial process would have had to occurred, and what we have here, was not a judicial process.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  173. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    Justice Minister Judith Collins had abused her power, breached his rights to natural justice, acted in bad faith and acted in a “biased and unreasonable manner”.

    No mention of the rights of the five victims…no surprises there. Just as David’s affidavit demanding a payout didn’t mention his parents.

    The wrongful conviction of me in 1995 took away my inheritance. My Dad had a beautiful collection of string instruments and Mum had her pottery. These items are only a tiny amount of the items they collected during their lives and all have been lost to me. Further examples are Stephen’s trumpet and Arawa’s flute, a collection of opals from Australia, a collection of Royal Doulton pieces, artwork, books, music, the land and the house itself.

    On top of all this, Mum and Dad had amassed an impressive library of photos and videos documenting the many years they had been together and our family growing up together. All of these items, while not having great monetary value, all have a far higher sentimental value to me as they were my family’s possessions and would have been the things I could have remembered them by. Now all I have are the few photos released by my relatives to the Court for Use during the 2009 retrial.

    I have been told that I had the potential to have a career as successful as the New Zealand opera singer Jonathan Lemalu. Mr Lemalu is now engaged two years in advance and is singing all over the world. In 1992, my singing teacher told me when I started lessons that I had a wonderful voice and that I could one day create a valuable career for myself. … The wrongful conviction of me and the time I spent in prison meant that the life I was planning has gone out the window. I feel as though I lost the major earning years of my life.

    It seems David is desperatley missing his father’s stringed instruments, Stephen’s trumpet, Arawa’s flute, Margaret’s pottery, opals, Royal Doulton pieces, artwork, books, music, the land and the house. I wonder if he is missing his parents or sibilings?

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 16 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  174. Paulus (2,485 comments) says:

    Pay Bain $1 – neither confirm or deny liability thereby.
    QED.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  175. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/8245040/Bain-deliberately-left-out-of-review-proceedings

    “It’s lucky there are no gallows in New Zealand otherwise David wouldn’t be around to claim for compensation,” Karam said.

    The gallows would have spared us his thundering campaign largely based on poisonous rumour to defend the indefensible.

    The majority, who knows next-to-nothing about the case, might say, “I think he’s innocent.” Ask them why, and you get,”The old man was having sex with his daughter”.

    What a pack of lies. He wouldn’t have asked a lodger to stay with him and Laniet in the schoolhouse. Certainly deviants find ways of dealing with complicated circumstances but they NEVER STRIVE to make their offending more difficult to achieve. It’s a monstrous lie.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  176. Nookin (3,031 comments) says:

    Judith
    You are still confusing “wrongful imprisonment”, where a conviction is quashed, with the tort of “wrongful imprisonment” which entitles someone to claim damages. Perhaps I should refer to the tort as “false imprisonment” which is probably its correct name. David cannot sue for damages for false imprisonment because he cannot establish a cause of action. If he could then we would not have been messing around with the Binnie report and cabinet guidelines.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  177. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    David Bain has Buckley’s chance of getting any compensation anyway.

    Mark Buckley? :)

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  178. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    It seems David is desperatley missing his father’s stringed instruments, Stephen’s trumpet, Arawa’s flute, Margaret’s pottery, opals, Royal Doulton pieces, artwork, books, music, the land and the house. I wonder if he is missing his parents or sibilings?

    Those things were taken from him, incorrectly, by people who are still living and should have the integrity to return them.
    His Family were taken by a since deceased person and cannot ever be returned.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  179. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    Ask them why, and you get,”The old man was having sex with his daughter”.

    Yeah, isn’t it funny how having sex with your daughter becomes a motive for killing your youngest son, two daughters and wife…I’m surprised we don’t see more mass killings based on that logic.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  180. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    What a pack of lies. He wouldn’t have asked a lodger to stay with him and Laniet in the schoolhouse. Certainly deviants find ways of dealing with complicated circumstances but they NEVER STRIVE to make their offending more difficult to achieve.

    You are right. Which is why the old man didn’t invite him. The lies are yours.
    http://courtnews.co.nz/story.php?id=1927

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  181. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    Yeah, isn’t it funny how having sex with your daughter becomes a motive for killing your youngest son, two daughters and wife…I’m surprised we don’t see more mass killings based on that logic.

    There is nothing funny about having sex with your daughter, except in the minds in truly sick people.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  182. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    @Judith. Why don’t you go on a long sea cruise? The fresh air might help to clear your brain, which is cluttered with a whole lot of stuff you don’t understand. Forget the law, you are just confusing yourself.

    Look at the facts. I’m not going to spell them out again. The narrative Robin did it is preposterous, a chain of improbabilities that stretch credulity from here to the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.

    Don’t look at David. All this “umming” and “ahhing” and “I forgetting”. He may well be living in denial, but don’t confuse that with innocence. He’s not a cuddly toy, he’s a freak: “MY CORE BELIEF IS I WAS NOT THERE.”

    You’re in the same boat as that silly woman who was banged up in South America for smuggling drugs for some criminal. She got sucked in and so did you.

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  183. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Nookin (2,373) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 10:56 am

    No I am not confusing the two.

    I am not commenting about David suing for damages, or anything like what you suggest. Those are separate issues, and dependent on a variety of issues for which there is no legislation.

    It is about the ‘miscarriage of justice’. That statement basically means all that has occurred prior to that point, does not exist, because the processes that determined it, were not judicial processes. Being imprisoned, is part of that judicial process, that ‘doesn’t exist’. The ability to seek compensation etc, in this country is a political decision, as we are seeing. However, that does no by any stretch of the imagination mean that whatever the decision received from cabinet, removes the fact that David Bain was imprisoned, when he shouldn’t have been. Even a refusal to pay compensation, would not remove that fact.

    That people would like for various reasons to pretend the Privy Councils decision can be ignored and that any subsequent decision from Cabinet will declare a new status for David Bain, they are dreaming. If they call him a murderer, they will still be making a defamatory statement. His legal status will still be the same as the rest of us, innocent until proven guilty.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  184. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10862535

    Now Karam is comparing the Justice Minister to the KGB and Robert Mugabe. He really has lost the plot.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  185. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    @Kanz. The schoolhouse was Robin’s. Anyone staying there was a guest of Robin’s, including Laniet.

    You keep repeating the same old rubbish. Laniet told all sorts of stuff to all sorts of people and it was all made up. Like having babies, black babies. Lies, if you want to be cruel.

    EVEN accepting for a minute the motive was the spilling of the beans on incest, why did Robin not just kill himself? Why did he kill the others? Why kill Arawa who was doing so well? Why leave just one? Why leave the arsehole who was threatening the family with the rifle and locking them out of the lounge?

    You are indeed in need of some kind of counselling if you think this makes any sense, and don’t come back to me saying Robin was disturbed. He may have been, but he was functioning well enough to insist to David that he got the chainsaw to take to school that day. It was in his van. Of course he didn’t know he wasn’t going to school again.

    You’re like those Floods in Australia: Wet to the ears and all over the place.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  186. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Dennis Horne (547) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 11:12 am
    —————————

    Your ‘facts’ are not facts Dennis. They are opinions and misrepresentations based on data you appear to have pulled out of hat, some of which doesn’t even exist. You are consistently wrong about the most basic of details. Consistently refuse to address factual evidence that disproves your chosen scenario, and cannot offer explanations for the most basic and solid physical evidence.

    You seem to base your whole judgement on the fact David made a clarifying statement “my core belief is I wasn’t there”.
    In doing so you fail to allow for the fact that David has been cited by many witnesses as speaking in a formal manner (even as a school student). However that is irrelevant. If that is all you have to base your ‘facts’ on, then you are one very desperate man, and I’m not interested in discussing it with you further. I’ve done so before, provided you with links to witness statements etc, and you just ignore the bits you want to and carry on with your same mantra, based on ignorance. The best thing you could do is ignore me, in the manner I ignore most of what you say.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  187. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    EVEN accepting for a minute the motive was the spilling of the beans on incest, why did Robin not just kill himself? Why did he kill the others? Why kill Arawa who was doing so well?

    Because he believed, as his brother has been quoted as saying, that family honour is greater than personal honour. Had he left those who knew about the incest, the family’s honour would have been destroyed. He had no idea that so many others already knew about it, and were still able to say so.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  188. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    Because he believed, as his brother has been quoted as saying, that family honour is greater than personal honour. Had he left those who knew about the incest, the family’s honour would have been destroyed. He had no idea that so many others already knew about it, and were still able to say so.

    Does your crystal ball also tell you what the winning Lotto numbers are going to be?

    Oh, and that would be “alleged” incest.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  189. hamnidaV2 (247 comments) says:

    I’ve said it before, there is no new story here.

    Collins needs a report saying Bain is guilty – She will shoulder tap a Tory or Tories to write the report – The report’s findings will be contrary to Binnie’s – Collins makes a recommendation to Cabinet suggesting Bain should not receive any compensation.

    It’s pretty obvious ins’t it.

    This is about politics, not justice.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  190. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Dennis Horne (548) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 11:25 am

    …………….ou keep repeating the same old rubbish. Laniet told all sorts of stuff to all sorts of people and it was all made up. Like having babies, black babies. Lies, if you want to be cruel.

    ——————————

    Prove it was a lie!
    We have David who says he doesn’t believe she had a baby, however, there have been many cases where family members have hidden pregnancy from other siblings, so that doesn’t prove anything. There was no physical examination done on Laniet’s body that disproves her statement.

    So, what do you base your judgement that she lied on? What proof do you have?

    There is proof that Laniet invited the lodger to stay. That is all you can take from that. You have no conversation or witness that proves the decision was Robin’s. You are going solely on your own experiences, but they are not relevant. So the only thing that can be certain, is it was not Robin Bain that invited the lodger, but Laniet. Anything else you decide is based on ass-umption.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  191. Nookin (3,031 comments) says:

    “Collins needs a report saying Bain is guilty ”

    No she doesn’t. All she needs is one page on which to write

    “You are outside the guidelines. You are not getting anything”.

    If you were correct and this was a political decision then this is all she would do. You are not correct. You are simply motivated by a hatred of anything remotely associated with the National Party and your entire thinking is clouded by that hatred.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  192. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    ross69 (1,922) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 11:06 am

    Yeah, isn’t it funny how having sex with your daughter becomes a motive for killing your youngest son, two daughters and wife…I’m surprised we don’t see more mass killings based on that logic.
    ———————————-

    Incest is identified in many cases of familicide where the older father kills children and siblings.

    Incest didn’t make Robin kill his family. The mental state he was in at the time did. Accusations of incest may have been the catalyst that pushed him to take action, but as witnesses, many of whom had psychological qualifications, stated, Robin had been deteriorating for some time prior to the killings. He had acted in a manner not usual for him. Been aggressive, showed signs of being depressed, was not performing in a professional capacity, was estranged from his wife, and not happy about that, had hit struck 2 children at his school, was physically unwell, and was not keeping good hygiene (he smelled), he lived in squalled conditions, and his family seemed to be moving forward, making decisions without him, he had very little personal money.

    He was a disaster waiting to happen. That people stood by and did nothing to help him, is inconceivable. Whether incest occurred or not, I think Robin Bain had finally reached his limit.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  193. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Nookin (2,374) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 11:42 am
    “Collins needs a report saying Bain is guilty ”

    No she doesn’t. All she needs is one page on which to write

    “You are outside the guidelines. You are not getting anything”.

    ———————————–

    Sorry, that is not correct. The application for compensation was accepted and referred to a QC, which under the guidelines means he was accepted as qualifying to be considered. If he did not meet that test, the matter would not have been referred to a QC and he would have received an outright rejection at that point.

    Whether he meets the test of the criteria for payment is another matter, and any refusal will have to be justified by the Cabinet. It will take more than one page of paper you can be sure of that, should it happen.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  194. Jacob Cohen (44 comments) says:

    Nookin – David cannot sue for damages for false imprisonment because he cannot establish a cause of action. If he could then we would not have been messing around with the Binnie report and cabinet guidelines.

    Judith – It is about the ‘miscarriage of justice’. That statement basically means all that has occurred prior to that point, does not exist, because the processes that determined it, were not judicial processes. Being imprisoned, is part of that judicial process, that ‘doesn’t exist’. The ability to seek compensation etc, in this country is a political decision, as we are seeing. However, that does no by any stretch of the imagination mean that whatever the decision received from cabinet, removes the fact that David Bain was imprisoned, when he shouldn’t have been. Even a refusal to pay compensation, would not remove that fact.

    “Being imprisoned, is part of that judicial process, that ‘doesn’t exist’.”
    Still, David did seem to be in jail for a while there
    Perhaps Karam needs to start again by asking Collins under the OIA why David spent nearly 13 years in prison.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  195. Jacob Cohen (44 comments) says:

    Nookin – David cannot sue for damages for false imprisonment because he cannot establish a cause of action. If he could then we would not have been messing around with the Binnie report and cabinet guidelines.

    Judith – It is about the ‘miscarriage of justice’. That statement basically means all that has occurred prior to that point, does not exist, because the processes that determined it, were not judicial processes. Being imprisoned, is part of that judicial process, that ‘doesn’t exist’. The ability to seek compensation etc, in this country is a political decision, as we are seeing. However, that does no by any stretch of the imagination mean that whatever the decision received from cabinet, removes the fact that David Bain was imprisoned, when he shouldn’t have been. Even a refusal to pay compensation, would not remove that fact.

    “Being imprisoned, is part of that judicial process, that ‘doesn’t exist’.”
    Still, David did seem to be in jail for a while there
    Perhaps Karam needs to start again by asking Collins under the OIA why David was there.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  196. Norma (6 comments) says:

    Why would you spare david ?

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  197. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    Ms Collins stuck to her guns yesterday ,saying she had taken steps to ensure the process was “fair and proper throughout”.

    She said “Put simply ,it would be unacceptable for Cabinet to base it’s decision for compensation on an unsafe and flawed report. That would not have resulted in justice for anyone,let alone Mr Bain.”

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  198. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    @Kanz. If he needed to silence the family as well as himself he would not have left one, the arsehole who locked him out of his own lounge. He could have, if he was capable of murdering his family, set David up.

    I repeat that: IF ROBIN WAS CAPABLE OF MURDERING HIS FAMILY HE COULD HAVE KILLED DAVID TOO AND SET HIM UP AS A SUICIDE.

    That would his solved his problem saved his life.

    @Judith. The forensics are there for all to see and they are facts in as much anything is a fact.. Nothing connects Robin to the rifle of the killings. NOTHING. Everything points at David.

    Take just one piece. What is the likelihood a man can do all that Robin is alleged to have done and retain his normal overnight load of urine? Is it 1 in a 100, 1 i a 1000, one in 10,000? One in a million? Tell me what you think.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  199. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    hamnidaV2 (52) Says:

    January 31st, 2013 at 11:36 am
    I’ve said it before, there is no new story here.

    Collins needs a report saying Bain is guilty – She will shoulder tap a Tory or Tories to write the report – The report’s findings will be contrary to Binnie’s – Collins makes a recommendation to Cabinet suggesting Bain should not receive any compensation.

    As I have already pointed out to you hamnida, a Tory is a member or supporter of the Conservative Party in Britain.
    I don’t think Ms Collins will be “shoulder tapping ” one of them to write the report.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  200. Rowan (1,778 comments) says:

    Dennis
    You are sounding like you know a good deal about urology as an ex dentist, how are they actually related? ’10 reasons to convict ten times’ or more appropriately 10 speculated items requiring on considerable assumption (most of which are demonstratably incorrect)
    i.e. 1. Normal overnight urine load despite fighting Stephen to the death and washing up
    Dr Dempster said there was 400ml urine in the bladder, nothing about ‘normal overnight load’ also he was not a urologist and it was a complex area and he said nothing could be inferred from it. If you look at the urologist who gave evidence he also said ‘nothing could be concluded from the 400ml of urine in the bladder. For some people 400ml did not cause any urgency at all, especially in an ageing male with an enlarged prostate like Robin. Adrenalin or agitation could also reduce urine production’
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/2441882/Last-Bain-witness-gives-evidence

    Your other points have about as much weight as the first i.e. 0.0000% and I see your favourite ‘why’ question, yet I don’t see any evidence from you that this was a ‘planned’ killing at all

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  201. Nookin (3,031 comments) says:

    Judith

    Not if it is a political decision as Hamnida says.

    I agree with you which is why I bluntly rejected Hamnida’s strident criticisms of the National Party. He/she can only comment by placing any circumstance in a political spectrum no matter how much the issues are divorved from politics.

    There are protocols to be followed. I do not necessarily agree with you on the enforceability and status of those protocols and the remedies that may be available. I should also add that my view of the position is not influenced by any expectation of a specific outcome. If Bain gets compensation following an appropriate assessment then so be it.

    He didn’t come within the guidelines. He still has to establish special circumstances

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  202. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    Dennis Horne (549) Says:

    January 31st, 2013 at 12:01 pm
    @Kanz. If he needed to silence the family as well as himself he would not have left one, the arsehole who locked him out of his own lounge. He could have, if he was capable of murdering his family, set David up.

    I repeat that: IF ROBIN WAS CAPABLE OF MURDERING HIS FAMILY HE COULD HAVE KILLED DAVID TOO AND SET HIM UP AS A SUICIDE.

    That would his solved his problem saved his life.

    Couldn’t agree more.
    It is so bleedin’ obvious that is what he would have done. No way would he have left David alive.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  203. hamnidaV2 (247 comments) says:

    You Tories seem obsessed that Bain is guilty.

    Remember a jury found Bain not-guilty after a very long trial.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  204. Rowan (1,778 comments) says:

    Why would you spare David? Why Why….

    The favourite argument of a bser, If Robin was the killer do you think he was acting rationally or had carefully planned what he was going to do? There is no evidence of planning at all maybe he didn’t intend to commit suicide or to spare David. You think we need to provide a rational reason for Robin to carry out this yet it is by definition a very irrational act! Judith is right from accounts Robin was a disaster waiting to happen and had reached his limit.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  205. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Dennis Horne (549) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 12:01 pm
    ——————-

    There is a vast array of material from competent scientific investigation that supports the fact that people in heightened states of ‘excitement’, including situations of fear, anxiety and mental stress, do not get the urge to urinate.

    You say it was overnight collection. Dr Dempster said the amount was consistent with an ‘overnight collection’, however, what should be clarified, is that there is no prescribed amount, only averages. There was also no testing undertaken that confirmed it had been in the bladder for sometime, i.e. that it was from overnight, and not from several cups of tea or similar.
    There is also evidence which suggests that men of Robin’s age can hold much more urine in their bladder before getting the urge to urinate.

    As Dr Dempster can confirm, it was not known what the capacity of Robin’s bladder was, therefore, conclusions cannot be drawn from the amount of urine in it, as to whether he would have needed to urinate or not.

    Good to see you can however draw conclusions, based on your expertise as what was it? A dentist or something like that. Or are you basing them simply on the fact you are a man, and therefore presume all men are exactly like you?

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  206. hamnidaV2 (247 comments) says:

    @Nookin – You live in a strange world if you don’t think this issue is political.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  207. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Rowan (501) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 12:15 pm
    —————-
    There is an argument that Robin did not intend to spare David, however, as the acts were committed in a state of mental confusion, the time lapse between the first killings, and possibly the blood of Stephen on his person, may resulted in him calming down, sufficiently for the reality of the situation of what he had done and the consequences to register. He may have decided David was the only one that deserved to live, because he (Robin) did not. The rest all being dead by time he made that decision.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  208. Psycho Milt (2,246 comments) says:

    She said “Put simply ,it would be unacceptable for Cabinet to base it’s decision for compensation on an unsafe and flawed report. That would not have resulted in justice for anyone,let alone Mr Bain.”

    Much as I hate Collins, that was a pretty funny comment. Translation: “accepting a report that declared Mr Bain innocent on the balance of probabilities would mean Mr Bain had not received the justice he deserves.” Yeah, that I can agree with.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  209. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    Rowan, you prat. He might not have needed to go as soon as he woke up but he certainly would have pissed his pants fighting Stephen to the death, and yet, after shooting the others, changing out of his bloodied clothes, washing up, showering possibly, he still had 400ml in the bladder. Pull the other one, you nincompoop.

    Incidentally, dentists used to study pretty much the same pathology as doctors, probably more than modern doctors, certainly more than my daughter studied at medical school. One professor of pathology at a medical school I know was a dentist. The Dean of University College Hospital Medical School when I there was a dentist. Also, the Institute of Stomatology (University of Paris) where I studied briefly, ALL the students studying dentistry where qualified doctors. So your “scathing” comments are just pissing in the wind. Straight into your ear.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  210. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    @ Judith squalid?
    Robin was the only one earning, if he had little ‘personal’ money as you say, it is because his ungrateful (according to you) family were leaching off of him.

    How according to you was this rebuild going to be funded, if not with Robin’s wage.

    Don’t bother replying, someone with the facts will probably answer me, I didn’t realise he was squalled as well, the poor man.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  211. Psycho Milt (2,246 comments) says:

    There is an argument that Robin did not intend to spare David, however, as the acts were committed in a state of mental confusion, the time lapse between the first killings, and possibly the blood of Stephen on his person, may resulted in him calming down, sufficiently for the reality of the situation of what he had done and the consequences to register. He may have decided David was the only one that deserved to live, because he (Robin) did not. The rest all being dead by time he made that decision.

    Er, that’s not an argument – it’s more like an article of religious faith.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  212. Rowan (1,778 comments) says:

    Dennis
    The prat here is you, do you really think you have a more qualified opinion on Robins bladder than Grant Russell the urologist called to give evidence?
    Washing up, showering, speculation here on your part? apart from the pyschiatric nutcase that was banned from here there is no evidence (or suggestions from crown or defence) that he did either.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  213. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Nookin (2,375) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 12:09 pm

    He still has to establish special circumstances
    ————————————-

    The extra ordinary circumstances are well established, in both the Privy Council & Retrial transcripts and report. They have also been established in the Binnie report. Whilst the Binnie report maybe rejected, the contents of it, can not be ignored.
    Especially the interviews. During the interview of Doyle, he made several statements which support the claim of extraordinary circumstances. Even without that, there is sufficient with the manner in which Det Sgt Weir conducted himself on the stand, and the tests etc not undertaken by the police, of which they cannot justify. Add to that the destruction of evidence which Doyle as admitted was wrong, you already have your extraordinary circumstances.

    The police answer, that if they hadn’t been so closely scrutinised, those errors would not have been established, hardly holds any weight. In fact, it almost sounds like an admission of wrongdoing to me.

    Extraordinary Circumstances are proven. The extent of them may need more discussion.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  214. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Psycho Milt (1,098) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 12:26 pm

    ——————–
    It becomes an argument if there is a contrary view. ;-)

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  215. Nookin (3,031 comments) says:

    H.
    It is not political. You are making it political. You shouldn’t. There is a difference between a political issue and a non-political issue from which politicians or others wrongly try to make political capital or score cheap political points. Unlike you, I do not view this matter in the light of any particular political philosophy. If you are so constrained by your own prejudices that you cannot do that then you are the one in an undesirable world.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  216. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    The simple fact is, Robin was dropped by the curtains as he entered the computer alcove, was picked up under the shoulders, thereby spilling blood onto the curtains, lugged across and dumped on the beanbag, the spare magazine placed on its edge by his outstretched hand, the rifle also placed in an unlikely way, ALL TO MAKE IT LOOK LIKE SUICIDE.

    That worked for a while until the pathologist entered and said it didn’t look like a real suicide. NO, IT LOOKED LIKE A FAKE SUICIDE as any only but a complete fool can see by looking at this photograph:

    http://davidbain.counterspin.co.nz/evidence/the-rifle-magazine-appeared-to-be-planted-next-to-robin-bains-body

    Nothing ties Robin to the rifle. NOTHING. He didn’t even smudge Stephen’s prints on the suppressor.

    “MY CORE BELIEVE IS I WAS NOT THERE.” Yeah, core belief all right. Apple core.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  217. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    goldnkiwi (153) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 12:23 pm

    The Bain’s owned other property, other than the house they lived in. They had also made substantial loans to ‘friends’, which were in the process of being collected. Robin was not the only person earning an income in the family. Both the girls were employed, part-time and David had his paper round. Margaret also did massages and readings etc.

    Thank you for pointing out my spelling errors. Pity you didn’t have some actual knowledge on the case to make some suggestions that add anything.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  218. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    LOL

    I just love it when people get all angry and start shouting in capitals and say Robin did this and that, based solely on their opinion, and not factual evidence.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  219. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    The extra ordinary circumstances are well established….They have also been established in the Binnie report.

    They haven’t been established at all. Go back and read Simon Power’s instructions to Binnie. Power explains what the ECs cover.

    And God knows why you keep quoting Binnie’s report. Do you quote David Irving when talking about the Holocaust?

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  220. Truthiz (185 comments) says:

    Why would you spare david ?

    You wouldn’t.
    One of the best indicators, the ridiculous computer message, its self obsessed theme is apparent, only david could have rated himself that highly …

    .

    I have been told that I had the potential to have a career as successful as the New Zealand opera singer Jonathan Lemalu. Mr Lemalu is now engaged two years in advance and is singing all over the world. In 1992, my singing teacher told me when I started lessons that I had a wonderful voice and that I could one day create a valuable career for myself.

    Absolute fantasy

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  221. Psycho Milt (2,246 comments) says:

    It is not political. You are making it political.

    Aw, give him a break. Given that only die-hard, Tory-hating left-wingers like, er, Bob Jones and Rodney Hide are backing David Bain, isn’t it an easy mistake for him to make?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  222. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Nookin (2,376) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 12:37 pm
    —————-

    I disagree to the extent that whilst I don’t believe it is about a ‘National Vs the Rest’ issue, I believe it is political because should David Bain receive compensation, then the flood gates will open. There are a number of people in similar position. Many who are not even mentioned in the papers and decisions barely get a public mention. Then, of course there are a few high profile cases.

    Should David Bain receive the substantial amount the guidelines indicate he would, that provides a big incentive for others to follow the same pathway – at a huge expense to the taxpayer.

    This is why I argue that the only fair, just and responsible way for this to be managed, is for the government to immediately establish at tribunal, as recommended by the Law Commission in their 1998 Report 31, and distance themselves from playing anything more than an administration role in the entire process. They have neither the expertise nor will be able to escape the accusations of ‘political bias’, as long as they continue to follow the current path.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  223. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    I just love it when people get all angry and start shouting in capitals

    You mean like Justice Binnie did when emailing Collins? :)

    http://static.stuff.co.nz/files/Binnie_response.pdf

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  224. Psycho Milt (2,246 comments) says:

    Robin was not the only person earning an income in the family… David had his paper round.

    Quote awesomeness almost a match for Judith Collins’ further up the thread.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  225. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    @Rowan. Moron. Of course I wouldn’t contradict a urologist on his speciality, but this is not urology. This is reality, science, a knowledge of “fight or flight”, psychology, reasoning, probability …

    What actually did the urologist say?

    Did he say it was consistent with reality to wake up and set out to kill the family:
    Strangling Stephen in a fight to the death,
    Shooting the others,
    Changing out of bloodied clothes,
    Washing up or maybe showering,
    Typing on the computer,
    Preparing the rifle to shoot himself.

    AND STILL HAVE 400ml of urine in the bladder?

    Regardless of whether it COULD happen, just as I MIGHT win Lotto but won’t, it is strongly inculpatory evidence David was the killer.

    You pick a bit here and you pick a bit there but your overall understanding is that of an 8 year-old. A TRUE MORON.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  226. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    ross69 (1,923) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 12:44 pm
    The extra ordinary circumstances are well established….They have also been established in the Binnie report.

    They haven’t been established at all. Go back and read Simon Power’s instructions to Binnie. Power explains what the ECs cover.

    “Extraordinary circumstances” discretion
    35.
    Compensation may be paid in non-eligible or ‘outside Guidelines’ cases, however,
    if there are extraordinary circumstances. When the Cabinet Criteria were adopted
    in 1 998, Cabinet agreed that the Crown reserve discretion to consider claims that
    fall outside the Guidelines “in extraordinary circumstances.. . on their individual
    merits, where this is in the interests of justice.”
    36.
    The question in cases such as Mr Bain’s is, therefore, whether there are
    extraordinary circumstances, where it is in the interests of justice for the claim to
    be considered. Cabinet did not determine what matters would constitute
    “extraordinary circumstances”. Claims of extraordinary circumstances have to be
    considered on their merits on a case-by-case basis, as does the assessment of the
    interests of justice.
    37.
    The following paragraphs outline the current articulation of the principles applying
    to applications that fall outside the Guidelines.
    38.
    Innocence on the balance of probabilities is a minimum requirement, consistent
    with the Guidelines for eligible claimants. But the bar is set higher for claims that
    fall outside the Guidelines – something more is required that demonstrates that the
    circumstances are extraordinary.
    This is because the discretion should not be
    used in a way that would undermine the Guidelines.
    39.
    Although there can never be an exhaustive list of the kind of circumstances that
    might be regarded as “extraordinary”, the mere fact that an appeal has been
    allowed could
    never, of itself,
    suffice.
    To qualify as extraordinary, the
    circumstances must include some feature which takes the claimant’s case outside
    the ordinary run of cases in which appeals have been allowed. Examples of such
    circumstances include, but are not limited to:

    unequivocal innocence
    - i.e. cases in which it was demonstrable that the
    claimant was innocent beyond reasonable doubt, for example, due to DNA
    evidence, strong alibi evidence, etc; or

    no such offence – i.e. the claimant had been convicted of an offence that did
    not exist in law; or

    serious wrongdoing by authorities
    - i.e. an official admission or judicial
    finding of serious misconduct in the investigation and prosecution of the
    case.
    Examples might include bringing or continuing proceedings in bad
    faith, failing to take proper steps to investigate the possibility of innocence,
    the planting of evidence or suborning perjury.
    40.
    The test of “extraordinary circumstances” is inherently open-ended and the list
    above cannot be treated as exhaustive. There may be rare cases where there are
    other extraordinary features that render it in
    the interests of justice that
    compensation be paid. The onus is on the claimant to show that his or her case
    has extraordinary circumstances such that it is in the interests of justice that the
    compensation claim be considered.
    This includes the requirement to prove
    innocence on the balance of probabilities.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  227. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    Absolute fantasy

    Well, David is a fantasist and probably a narcissist as well. He doesn’t care about his parents or siblings, he only cares about himself.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  228. Truthiz (185 comments) says:

    (Judith says) There is an argument that Robin did not intend to spare David, however, as the acts were committed in a state of mental confusion, the time lapse between the first killings, and possibly the blood of Stephen on his person, may resulted in him calming down, sufficiently for the reality of the situation of what he had done and the consequences to register. He may have decided David was the only one that deserved to live, because he (Robin) did not. The rest all being dead by time he made that decision.

    More fantasy, especially the add on of Stephens blood, lol, but I guess once you start telling lies you just dig a bigger hole. eh Ginny. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  229. lazarus (68 comments) says:

    “V (535) Says:

    January 30th, 2013 at 10:10 pm
    If he wants money maybe he could just focus on the movies, there could be lots of sequels:

    David Bain in “The Paper Round”.
    David & Robin
    David & Robin Returns
    David Forever
    Bain Begins
    Weekend at David’s
    David Bain in Die Hard
    The Bain Redemption
    The Famous Five:Rise of the Phantom Typer
    David & Karam:A Love Story
    David in Wonderland
    David Bain: Coming to a Chch Street near you.
    David Bain in No Recall
    Saving Private Bain
    The Bain Departed
    Fully Striped Jersey
    Lock, Stock and two Smoking Bains
    Bainspotting
    There will be Blood (Animal only)
    Confessions of David Bain
    The Princess Juror
    A Fistful of Legal Aid
    All Quiet on the Paperround
    Bain man”

    Pisssing myself laughing. made my day

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  230. Truthiz (185 comments) says:

    I just love it when people get all angry and start shouting in capitals

    You mean like Justice Binnie did when emailing Collins?

    Classic

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  231. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Ross69 (1,924) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 12:44 pm
    The extra ordinary circumstances are well established….They have also been established in the Binnie report.

    They haven’t been established at all. Go back and read Simon Power’s instructions to Binnie. Power explains what the ECs cover.

    Perhaps it is you that needs to go back and read it again Ross. The list clearly provides for things that have already been proven. Doyle’s admission to Binnie adds to that existing list. Extraordinary circumstances in this case are plentiful.

    To qualify as extraordinary, the
    circumstances must include some feature which takes the claimant’s case outside
    the ordinary run of cases in which appeals have been allowed. Examples of such
    circumstances include, but are not limited to:
    serious wrongdoing by authorities
    - i.e. an official admission or judicial
    finding of serious misconduct in the investigation and prosecution of the
    case.
    Examples might include bringing or continuing proceedings in bad
    faith, failing to take proper steps to investigate the possibility of innocence,
    the planting of evidence or suborning perjury.
    40.
    The test of “extraordinary circumstances” is inherently open-ended and the list
    above cannot be treated as exhaustive.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  232. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    serious wrongdoing by authorities – i.e. an official admission or judicial finding of serious misconduct in the investigation and prosecution of the case.

    Thanks, Judith. So, there needs to be an official admission or judicial finding of serious misconduct in the investigation and prosecution of the case. There has been no such admission or judicial finding. There are no extraordinary circumstances. Consequently, David has to prove innocence BRD.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  233. Nookin (3,031 comments) says:

    Judith
    I agree that this may set a precedent–not which is legally binding but one by which future cases may be measured. To that end there should be a clear policy including assessment protocols. Fisher and Binnie disagree on those. It is not a matter of party politics as Hamnida tries to make it. (See PMs post at 12.47 pm). I shudder at the possibility that compensation claims will be timed to coincide with elections and hopes for a change in government.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  234. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    Judith (1,192) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 12:39 pm
    goldnkiwi (153) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 12:23 pm

    The Bain’s owned other property, other than the house they lived in. They had also made substantial loans to ‘friends’, which were in the process of being collected. Robin was not the only person earning an income in the family. Both the girls were employed, part-time and David had his paper round. Margaret also did massages and readings etc.

    Thank you for pointing out my spelling errors. Pity you didn’t have some actual knowledge on the case to make some suggestions that add anything.
    …………….
    My pleasure;), you do not often make them and it wasn’t a spelling mistake per se in my opinion, you must be feeling stressed.

    I have to say that Privvy by one of your cohorts gets to me, but then that is the problem with cutting and pasting ad nauseum, because I can’t imagine that being the case if written repeatedly from scratch and edited (when the function loads lol). That same diatribe seems to include there instead of their too.

    I did wonder if they were just deliberate mistakes to try and distinguish posts as different persona when really there was a ‘cunning plan’.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  235. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    Judith

    You might like to acquaint yourself with the Fisher Report. Fisher goes into some detail about extraordinary circumstances…he infers there are none.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  236. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Truthiz (133) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 12:54 pm

    ——————————

    I”ve never used the name Ginny, I have however used the name Jinny, but only before using this name and was not able to log in with it any more once the password was lost. That doesn’t seem to be a problem to anyone, but you.

    You seem to have a very short memory, because you have been told this before.

    You also never seem to comment on the case but only ever pass personal insults. Is that because you actually can’t join such a discussion because you don’t know anything about it, but prefer instead to add your bit to the JFRB effort by keeping up the ethos of denigration aimed at anyone who dares to oppose the group?

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  237. lazarus (68 comments) says:

    Karams latest desparate move is just a time waisting/staving exercise.
    Hes hoping for a either a public opinion or Goverment change.
    Neither are likely to happen to his advantage.
    His actions are doomed to failure as this whole compo claim has always been.
    If Cabinet approved paying David one cent they would be a laughing stock and they know it.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  238. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    “Karams latest desparate move is just a time waisting/staving exercise.”

    You think there’s pretty lean pickings here, then? :)

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  239. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    ross69 (1,927) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 1:00 pm

    —————————-

    I have read the Fisher report.
    It doesn’t change anything I’m sorry.
    The list of acceptable extraordinary circumstances was provided by Power and that list stands, regardless of Fisher’s interpretation of it, existing evidence proves them.

    Fisher has only offered his review on that matter, however even with that, he does not totally exclude or excuse the matter of extraordinary circumstances, and do not forget, he has never conducted a full investigation on the matter. He has not heard/seen the evidence. His opinion is not the ‘final’ word, no matter how much you would like it to be.

    If it was capable of being that, Collins would have clearly made her recommendation by now.

    Fisher can be, and has been easily discredited. He was a lawyer that walked out of the Thomas Royal Commission and sided with the police. The public have not forgotten where his allegiance lies. Collins was extremely foolhardy in using him, and she would be committing career suicide (she is already part way there) to use him again.

    Fisher is known as a Police supporter. The public are huge supporters of AAT who was wronged by the police. Even those who aren’t sure whether Bain committed the crime or not, will not stand for Fisher being influential in anything that decides police wrongdoing. Even Collins isn’t stupid enough to try that one.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  240. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    lazarus (61) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 1:04 pm

    If Cabinet approved paying David one cent they would be a laughing stock and they know it.
    —————————

    And yet 74% of people polled by the NZ Herald said they thought compensation should be paid.

    And the cabinet is already a laughing stock, among the international judiciary. They have become a source of much ridicule, especially Collins. Between this and her managing of ACC, she has ruined her own career. She will never be PM, which is something she was lining herself up to be.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  241. lazarus (68 comments) says:

    Sorry Judith DB is no AAT.
    To make that analagy is to show the utmost disrespect to the victims of the crime. (the Bain family)
    David Bain is not a victim of anything as he is portayed by you but someone who is very very lucky to have his freedom.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  242. Truthiz (185 comments) says:

    And on that note, we leave again …

    Only came back because i thought the decision would have been made by now and then the JoKa circus started again.

    I will leave you all to chase each other on the merry-go-round of possibilities …

    Me, I’m off to the beach, Bethells, unfortunately Brian, but if you are up to it, I will show you how deep the waters are.

    Have good one people and remember,

    David wrote the computer message.

    David planned and executed his whole family.

    :)

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  243. lazarus (68 comments) says:

    Judith in the more recent TradeMe poll 80% think DB is guilty.
    On ipredict before Karams latest gambit lass than 3% thought he would ever get compo.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  244. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    The Bill of Rights Act 1990 gives David Bain neither rights to compensation nor rights to due process in claiming compensation. This is because the decision is for the Cabinet to decide and the Cabinet is the master of it’s own destiny.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  245. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    goldnkiwi (154) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 12:58 pm

    ——————————
    Have you been drinking?

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  246. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    muggins (1,831) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 1:20 pm

    ————————-

    You total plonker. Of course it doesn’t mention compensation. But it provides the premise for fair and equitable process.

    Honestly, I really suggest you keep away from putting your particular spin on Human Rights. There aren’t any ‘friends’ you can pretend to phone on this one.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  247. Truthiz (185 comments) says:

    (Jinny says)You also never seem to comment on the case but only ever pass personal insults. Is that because you actually can’t join such a discussion because you don’t know anything about it, but prefer instead to add your bit to the JFRB effort by keeping up the ethos of denigration aimed at anyone who dares to oppose the group?

    Ahhhhh, hmmmm, nah can’t be bothered

    later ……………………………………….

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  248. Nookin (3,031 comments) says:

    Fisher didn’t pull any punches when dealing with the police in the Farmer claim. He bluntly pointed out the deception of the detective.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  249. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    lazarus (63) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 1:20 pm

    ————————–

    There are a hell of a lot more people who read the herald, than those that use the TM polls. Just compare the numbers of participants will tell you that. Also I think it could be easy to justify, that the posters on TM, are on the whole, not representative of the general population.

    ipredict, is just a place for fools who like to gamble. Again, hardly representative of the population.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  250. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Nookin (2,378) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 1:24 pm
    ————————-

    But denied the claim anyway.
    How he managed to make a decision without obtaining all the information remains somewhat of a mystery.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  251. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    lazarus (63) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 1:17 pm

    David Bain is not a victim of anything as he is portayed by you but someone who is very very lucky to have his freedom.
    ————————————-

    Prove it!

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  252. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    hamnidaV2 (56) Says:

    January 31st, 2013 at 12:12 pm
    You Tories seem obsessed that Bain is guilty.

    Remember a jury found Bain not-guilty after a very long trial.

    Vote: 2 7

    hamnida, for the third time, a Tory is a member or supporter of the Conservative Party in Great Britain.
    And I can assure you there are many Labour Party supporters that believe Bain is guilty and I would advise Charles Chauvel to take note of that or he could be out on his ear next year.
    Personally I am apolitical , though if the party in power is doing what I think is a good job I will vote for them, but if I think the other [main] party could do a better job then I will vote for them

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  253. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    There is a mass of evidence. The likelihood Robin killed himself approaches zero. That’s why there isn’t enough evidence for David to prove his innocence. Not police incompetence. That’s just propaganda. And the poisonous rumour of incest. Not much else though.

    NO Robin-prints on rifle. NO smudging Stephen’s pristine prints on muzzle. NO forensics point at Robin.

    What we see is a fake suicide scene. “MY CORE BELIEF IS I WAS NOT THERE.” Freak.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  254. Nookin (3,031 comments) says:

    Judith
    I think you have the wrong claim. Fisher found Farmer innocent beyond reasonable doubt. Farmer got $350,000

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  255. flipper (3,524 comments) says:

    David,

    I have considered, carefully, your current post on this matter, and the comments of sensible folk, for several hours before deciding to write this.

    It would help the many, poor simple souls, who worked unpaid, to get national elected in 2008 and 2011, understand why we should continue support for this Government (through to and including the 2014 General Election), if you would explain, in simple terms, that can be understood by a person with a “Standard Four” level of education, this (your) comment:

    “I would be amazed if the judicial review gets anywhere. The Bain claim for compensation in fact falls outside the Cabinet guidelines. Bain and Karam have asked for Cabinet to use their discretion to give him compensation even though he doesn’t qualify outside the guidelines. It would be highly unusual for the courts to inject a Minister from reporting an issue to Cabinet involving a discretionary decision.
    The Cabinet could in fact have just said “No, you do not qualify – go away”.”

    You might, like me, be cabbage looking, but neither of us is green by any definition.

    I cannot understand your position, unless it is simply an obsequious stance by you and some others able to frequently catch the ears of some Ministers and their non-departmental advisors.

    Whoever is giving you advice on this matter, be it political or legal, is away with the fairies. From the moment that silly Collins adopted and implemented her demented stance (Lord help us if she did it with Cabinet approval), an unholy mess was visited upon National. Even that legendary Standard Four Education woman would have seen coming what Collins ignored.

    Do you think for one moment that out Supreme Court is going to say the Privy Council was wrong?
    Do you believe the Court will say the 2009 Jury was wrong?

    Now to serious issues: Remember Collins’ admonition (to Mr. Bain) “is careful what you hope for” (paraphrased)? I am sure you do.

    But there is now a really serious situation that she will never have hoped for.
    With the filing of the Judicial Review proceedings, Joe Karam, Michael Reed and David Bain have upped the stakes and called her bluff.

    Unless the Courts accord Mr. Bain the privacy they so willingly gave to the Government and Maori interests, this matter will continue well into 2014.

    It is inevitable that Collins (aka National) will lose the Judicial Review. (The silly woman should have bit the bullet, paid up and shut up – over the objections of the bruised departmental egos.), and the inevitable consequences will open a weeping political sore.

    This issue has the potential to be gangrenous come 2014.

    New Zealanders may be split on the David Bain issue. But the overwhelming majority knows foul play when they see it. And being simple folk, DO NOT LIKE IT, OR THOSE THAT PRACTICE IT.

    Others are also saying this. More, and more will add to voices and words, to the chorus of dissatisfaction with Collins.

    As Bob Jones says, it is time for John Key, Bill English, and Stephen Joyce to step in and show real leadership.

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  256. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    @ Judith, why do you think you are authoritative and what you say determinative.

    Beware the narcissist. ;) They are overly represented in ‘statistics’.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  257. lazarus (68 comments) says:

    Judith (1,202) Says:

    “January 31st, 2013 at 1:30 pm
    lazarus (63) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 1:17 pm

    David Bain is not a victim of anything as he is portayed by you but someone who is very very lucky to have his freedom.
    ————————————-

    Prove it!”

    But theres the rub. David has to PROVE his innocence. He can’t do that. So no compo. Its pretty simple really.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  258. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    muggins (1,832) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 1:20 pm
    ——————-

    I have to say, you obviously aren’t aware of who the Bain team are in this new case.

    Prof. Joseph quite literally wrote the book on constitutional law in NZ, and he does not put his good name up against anything that he does not expect to win. He would not be supporting an application for judicial review if there weren’t decent grounds. His level of knowledge will provide the team with everything they need. Apart from that, he is a man with a tremendous about of respect from both the judiciary and the legal profession.

    His taking this case is huge, big, enormous!

    You really don’t know what you are talking about on this one Muggins – Compensation has nothing to do with human rights! LOL.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  259. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    @Judith, want a quick buck? iPredict: $0.0001. Every dollar returns $10,000. Put some money on for your man, Judith.

    https://www.ipredict.co.nz/app.php?do=contract_detail&contract=BAIN.COMP.MAY.2013

    By the way, I heard he didn’t get his rifle back. Is that right?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 13 You need to be logged in to vote
  260. Rowan (1,778 comments) says:

    Dennis
    You are a total plonker who picks and chooses what you wish to believe, “No forensics point at Robin” actually none of the forensics from Margaret, Arawa or Laniets bedrooms distinguish between either Robin or David as the perpatrator, also very limited evidence from Stephens room. You like to ‘spin’ the evidence about the glasses to try and connect David to the crime but it is very weak and you have no prove that they were used. Try looking in the lounge for forensics and EVERYTHING points to suicide, blood splatter, standing upright, trajectory, contact wound, blood on body not consistent with head wound etc etc. The possibility of David shooting Robin and setting it up to so closely resemble suicide at 22 years old is not much more than 0%, the lack of fingerprints is your only argument but remember that indentifiable fingerprint recovery occurs in <5% of occassions and there were also about 9 smudged unidentifiable fingerprints.
    Your argument to date is as usual 0.0000% convincing!

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  261. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    @Rowan. Moron. Nothing ties Robin to the rifle. Nothing. Moron. He didn’t even smudge Stephen’s pristine prints on the suppressor. Moron. The suppressor the killer had no need to touch. Moron.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  262. Rowan (1,778 comments) says:

    Lets now vote on the various polls whether David will or won’t get compensation shall we?
    Amazing how many twits on here (Lazarus, Muggins, Ross etc) think that the court of public opinion will actually decide (or have any influence at all) on the outcome. Even if a particular poll has 100% votes to 0 then it still make 0% difference to the outcome.
    At least some of us don’t have to sign the ‘justice for Daddy’ petition multiple times in order to achieve <1% of votes from the total NZ population. LMAO

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  263. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    Foul play? Bohze moi there’s some real loonies commenting here.

    Foul play would be killing your mother, father, brother and sisters. Not saying: “MY CORE BELIEF IS I WAS NOT THERE.”

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  264. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    http://davidbain.counterspin.co.nz/evidence/eyewitness-testimony-of-david-intimidating-his-family-with-his gun

    Bain told Binnie there was no lock to the lounge door. He lied.
    Listen to Kirsten Koch.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  265. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    http://davidbain.counterspin.co.nz/evidence/eyewitness-testimony-of-david-intimidating-his-family-with-his-gun

    Second time lucky.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  266. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    “MY CORE BELIEF IS I WAS NOT THERE.”

    My core belief is that David is a pathological liar and is stalling for time.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  267. lazarus (68 comments) says:

    Rowan!
    Welcome back.
    Still pushing turds up hill are we?
    Hope you havn’t been mistreating that goat again.
    My core belief is that you probably are though.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  268. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    I haven’t read the Law Commission recommendations re compensation for a few years. But obviously the recommendations and what the Government decided to do rather than sign the UN protocol, can’t have been designed to be all the things claimed in papers filed in the High Court by David Bain. There, as I said before, is also precedent, possibly right back to the Thomas case which needs to align. But the biggest hurdle is not only the way Collins acted, on the advice of how JR might apply to some named in Binnie’s report, that she excluded parties and elevated a ex Judge of inferior standing to ‘peer’ review and so on, but for the Court to answer if a person rights under BORA can be denied by executive whim, or a step further if the power the Government adopted was intended to strip applicants of the normal rights to Justice.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  269. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    A witness, Janice Clark, testified that David had told her days after the murders that he had worn his mother’s glasses after his own had been broken the previous Thursday. (Janice’s husband, Bob, proffered similar testimony.) However, David informed Binnie that: “I don’t think I would have said that to her.”

    He doesn’t think? In other words, he MIGHT have told her that he was wearing his mother’s glasses. That’s weird, because he testified at his trial that he didn’t wear them, though he apparently told his lawyer and co-counsel that he had worn them the night before the murders. It’s clear we cannot attach much (if any) weight to David’s statements.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  270. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Reading back a few posts I can see the children are certainly distressed today, must be worried about things being heard in open Court with all the parties able to be involved.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  271. Rowan (1,778 comments) says:

    Better watch out Muggins
    Lazarus is getting excited about the G word, maybe he might like to join in with you!

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  272. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    Lazarus,

    In Dunedin, a young man named David goes to a rabbi and complains, “Life is unbearable. There are 6 of us living in one room. What can I do?”

    The rabbi answers, “Take your goat into the room with you.” David is incredulous, but the rabbi insists. “Do as I say and come back in a week.”

    A week later David comes back looking more distraught than before. “We cannot stand it,” he tells the rabbi. “The goat is filthy.” The rabbi then tells him, “Go home and let the goat out. And come back in a week.”

    David returns to the rabbi a week later, exclaiming, “Life is beautiful. We enjoy every minute of it now that there’s no goat — only the six of us.”

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  273. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    Professor Philip Joseph. What? Are you sure? Another lawyer boarding the bandwagon, huffing and puffing, unable to see the wood for the trees, hiding the truth in a thicket of legalese and fine-sounding words.

    No wonder our legal system is a costly circus; an anachronistic humbug. No doubt the law schools actually teach students how to bamboozle and trick juries. What’s the euphemism for that subject?

    For goodness sake, Judith Collins, set up a panel of scientists to write a report. If necessary some experiments to show the Robin suicide scene is almost certainly a fake. Shouldn’t be difficult. Probably show Robin did not kill himself “beyond a shaow of a doubt”. That would do nicely.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  274. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    Will David be there or will it just be his avatar?

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  275. Nookin (3,031 comments) says:

    Nost.NZ

    “but for the Court to answer if a person rights under BORA can be denied by executive whim…”

    Can you please specify those rights and the section of the Act (ie NZBORA) that confers them?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  276. flipper (3,524 comments) says:

    Nostalgia..
    Have been out of the loop for some time doing other things.

    Are you, Rowan, Kanz or Judith able to
    1. Say where any real detail of the clasim is available (That is JR applic), and
    2. What is the nature of the Bain legal team

    I see that Jack Nicholson’s buddies are still on the loose from Lake Alice and the Mason Clinic :)

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  277. Rowan (1,778 comments) says:

    Dennis
    Muppet, keep telling yourself that though, like you pick and choose what you wish to believe
    The gun was kept in the wardrobe with the key on the desk beside it, Robins clothes were also kept inside the wardrobe. It was also in a position where it would have fallen had he topped himself.
    Do you seriously believe that David knew of everything in the link Nos previously posted as a 22 year old? (here it is again)
    http://pic100.picturetrail.com/VOL717/13497329/24287721/405323125.jpg
    How do you imagine he learnt it, If you still believe then you are seriously deluded (but we already know that!)
    And yet you still have no explanation at all for the ‘murder’ scene

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  278. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Look on the bright side Dennis it will be someone else for the sisters to start stalking and for you to irrationally abuse as the sun goes down on your daily anger.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  279. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    Same old blowhards popping up on the blog to show their ignorance and self-importance. Thought all they had to do was bellow at Key and he’d sack Collins. Loud-mouthed trash, knighthoods and all not withstanding.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  280. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    I hope they are going to look at how Robin Bains’ human rights were ‘extinguished’.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  281. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    @Judith. You can never underestimate the innovativeness of Saskatchewan Farm Boys: At a high school in the small town of Wadena in Saskatchewan, a group of farm boy students decided to play a prank. They let three goats run loose inside the school during school hours. But before turning them loose, they painted numbers on the sides of the goats: 1, 2 and 4.
    School Administrators spent most of the day looking for it.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  282. gamefisher (416 comments) says:

    Thats the problem with our Justice system today it is governed more about the ‘letter of the law’ rather than the ‘intent of the law’. So now we are going to have a judicial review that will judge on the ‘letter of the law’ instead of what this matter is about and that is the fact finding mission to discover if D Bain is ‘factually innocent’.

    This ‘factual innocence’ can only come about if it is proven that Robin Bain committed suicide and murder ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ that is a very difficult task to say the least. If a ‘judicial review’ tries to force the Goverment to go with the Binnie report that definitely shows New Zealands Justice system is in decay. To use the ‘letter of the law’ in this way is just simply obscene as Binnie report was rubbish and a very expensive piece of rubbish.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  283. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    flipper (1,337) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 2:32 pm

    ————————

    Flipper, a copy of the Bain press release which will clear up some of the those answers for you.

    MEDIA STATEMENT BY JOE KARAM ON BEHALF OF DAVID BAIN
    IN RESPECT TO HIS CLAIM FOR COMPENSATION

    30 January 2013

    Today, a claim was filed in the Auckland High Court by David Bain against the Minister of
    Justice seeking judicial review of the actions taken by her since she received Justice Binnie’s
    report in late August 2012, including the secret process which culminated in the Fisher report.
    The claim includes allegations that the Minister has breached David’s rights to natural justice,
    breached his rights under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, acted in bad faith, abused
    her power, and acted in a biased, unreasonable and predetermined manner. Declarations are
    sought from the Court to this effect, along with any necessary further directions.
    The Minister has stated that she intends to recommend to Cabinet further options on Monday
    4 February 2013. In the circumstances, a request has been made to the Crown that any further
    action in relation to David’s claim be deferred pending the outcome of this judicial review.
    David Bain has particularly requested that I make it known that he anguished over the
    prospect of returning to Court, and only did so with great reluctance. The application is
    necessary because the Minister has continued her policy of refusing to constructively
    communicate with his advisers, and because he no longer has any confidence that his claim is
    being assessed in a fair manner.
    Any further enquiries please contact Joe Karam

    Legal Team:
    M P Reed QC

    Professor P A Joseph

    M A Karam

    Duncan Cotterill Solicitors, Auckland (D S McGill)

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  284. bhudson (4,734 comments) says:

    Can you please specify those rights and the section of the Act (ie NZBORA) that confers them?

    @Nookin,

    It’s the vibe of the thing…

    (Oh, and Mabo)

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  285. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    ross69 (1,930) Says:

    January 31st, 2013 at 11:00 am
    David Bain has Buckley’s chance of getting any compensation anyway.

    Mark Buckley?

    You mean the Mark Buckley who Judith still wants to contact to find out what sort of an act of sexual nature he was having with that goat?
    I reckon Buckley should front up and put Judith out of her misery.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  286. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    Judith

    Thanks for Joe’s phone number. Hopefully he’ll be happy to clear up a few issues…

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  287. flipper (3,524 comments) says:

    Thanks Judith
    More OTB coming. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  288. gamefisher (416 comments) says:

    Rowan 2:33
    1.That same article says 97% of suicides are contact Robins wasn’t (no doubt you say it was) shown conclusively.
    2. That same article says the blood penetration small calibre weapon such as .22 range from 1-1.5 inches

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  289. Nookin (3,031 comments) says:

    MABO?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  290. lazarus (68 comments) says:

    Ross and Dennis.
    Loving your goat anecdotes.

    My core beleif is that it was David and not his “freind” who was involved with the goat.
    I mean its so obvious. You know “I have this freind who likes goats in a you know…….”

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  291. bhudson (4,734 comments) says:

    @Nookin,

    As with “it’s the vibe of the thing” it is a reference to Dennis Denuto the rather hapless local lawyer Darryl Kerrigan uses to defend his and his neighbours’ property rights against govt compulsory acquisition, in The Castle.

    Denuto tried to cite the consititution, Mabo, the law and the vibe of the thing as reasons why the govt could not compulsorily acquire the properties.

    Mabo v Queensland (No 2) (commonly known as Mabo) was a landmark High Court of Australia decision recognising native title in Australia for the first time.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mabo_v_Queensland_%28No_2%29

    It’s all part of it – all part of the vibe…

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  292. Nookin (3,031 comments) says:

    Gotcha. I had better see the movie

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  293. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    ross69 (1,931) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 2:53 pm

    ——————————-

    That was the press release as it was sent.
    If I had edited it, you would criticise me for doing so.

    Phone Joe Karam if you must, make sure you give your full and legal name.
    Tell him of your theories and misrepresentations – I’m sure the man could do with a damn good laugh at your expense.

    The fact you think Joe Karam would be worried about you, demonstrates your delusions nicely.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  294. bhudson (4,734 comments) says:

    You won’t be disappointed. That DVD will go straight to the pool room

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  295. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    ross69 (1,931) Says:

    January 31st, 2013 at 2:53 pm
    Judith

    Thanks for Joe’s phone number. Hopefully he’ll be happy to clear up a few issues…

    Don’t forget to ask him to phone you back, save a dollar.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  296. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    Nookin (2,382) Says:

    January 31st, 2013 at 3:04 pm
    Gotcha. I had better see the movie

    Will be interesting to watch the actor playing Mark Buckley.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  297. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    Don’t forget to ask him to phone you back, save a dollar.

    Yeah I might text him first. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  298. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    ross69 (1,932) Says:

    January 31st, 2013 at 3:12 pm
    Don’t forget to ask him to phone you back, save a dollar.

    Yeah I might text him first.

    That might be the way to go. Tell him David was never naked, he had a blanket over his shoulders. That will get him all excited.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  299. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    The fact you think Joe Karam would be worried about you, demonstrates your delusions nicely.

    Hmmm where did I say that?

    I was going to ask him what he knows about the KGB and Robert Mugabe…oh, and ask him why David has told so many lies.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  300. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    muggins (1,835) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 2:51 pm

    ————————

    I have never said I wanted to find Mark Buckley.
    I have no need to, I already know, as I have told you before, exactly what happened, and what and who was involved, and have done for some time. I know exactly what the behaviour was, but you obviously don’t.

    Perhaps you could post the comment where I have stated I’d like to find Mark Buckley, and where I wanted to know what sort of act of a sexual nature was involved – we will wait to see you prove your words – or add that to the list other things that prove you are a liar. That list is getting very long now.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  301. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    Oh and seeing Joe got all hot and bothered about Dean Cottle not testifying at the first trial, was Joe concerned that jurors at the retrial never got to hear about David’s plan to rape a jogger and use his paper run as an alibi?

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  302. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    ross69 (1,933) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 3:16 pm

    —————————

    You are all talk – you’ve picked up on muggins ‘look at me’ behaviour.

    When you phone Mr Karam, please make sure you record the conversation, won’t you. We could all do with a good laugh!

    Of course, not missing the point that you think Joe Karam would put his private number on a press release! That part of your stupidity is hilarious.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  303. lazarus (68 comments) says:

    “I know exactly what the behaviour was, but you obviously don’t. ”

    Oooooooooh. I know something you don’t. I ‘m not going to share. Its mine. My secret. My precious. mine all mine.
    I am the only one who deserved to know the about the goat.
    Its my core belief that I am the only true keeper of this knowledge (even though I wasn’t there)

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  304. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    Judith (1,207) Says:

    December 15th, 2012 at 11:12 am
    Nookin (2,283) Says:
    December 15th, 2012 at 11:04 am

    ———–
    Sorry I actually read the question as Mark Buckley having the fantasy.

    Do I think Mark Buckley had sex with a goat? Factually how would I know? But I do know that it does and has happened, and probably more times than one would care to think about. It is possible, and I see no reason for David to lie. Lies are usually told for some advantage, and there was no advantage to anyone in that situation, so yes, I’d say I believe David.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  305. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    David Bain never said Buckley had sex with the goat.
    He said he witnessed something Buckley doing of a sexual nature that ‘looked silly’.

    Poor muggins lets his imagination get away on him at times.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  306. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    lazarus (67) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 3:23 pm

    ——————–

    You are a bit childish aren’t you?

    There are many people that know, not just me. In fact I’m really surprised that the spinners have not got hold of it long before know. It is of no importance, but I am loving the fact that they are as curious as hell about it, and the more they talk about it, the more distanced from the truth they get and the stupider they look.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  307. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    not missing the point that you think Joe Karam would put his private number on a press release

    So, the number belongs to another Joe?

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  308. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    Judith (1,207) Says:

    December 16th, 2012 at 9:37 am
    Chuck Bird (2,690) Says:
    December 16th, 2012 at 9:30 am

    ————————

    Was the animal hurt? Do teenagers dob mates in? As none of us were there, I don’t think anyone can make that sort of comment as there are no details. ‘He had sex with a goat’ – what kind of sex? The type is not clarified, was it fondling, intercourse, oral, etc etc. How can any person comment without knowing the exact details of the claim being made. Sex is a very big concept that can refer to a great number of behaviours and acts. I don’t think its a conversation any of us can justifiably get into with the limited information

    Calling Mark Buckley.
    Judith wants to know what sort of sex you had with that goat.
    I don’t believe you had sex with that goat, but Judith is sure you did.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  309. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    ross69 (1,935) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 3:34 pm
    —————————-

    I didn’t say that, stop twisting.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  310. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    muggins (1,840) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 3:35 pm
    ——————————

    See Muggins, you are lying again.
    No one said ‘he had sex with the goat’ – that is your somewhat questionable imagination.

    It is a conversation I can get into, because I do know, as do some others on here. However, we decided we like watching you squirm better than telling you what you want to know.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  311. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    muggins (1,840) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 3:35 pm
    ———————————

    Do you not understand the ‘ ‘ marks Muggins? I was answering another poster, who had said ‘sex with a goat’. I was simply trying to make him see that ‘sex’ is not just shagging as you at the time had said. You can take anything out of context but it won’t make you right.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  312. lilman (882 comments) says:

    Jesus Judith your stark raving fucking nuts,tell me you have not bred yet ?

    As you KNOW SO MUCH ,please tell me how the fuck you you know more than I ?

    You dont know me ,my name or my relationship to this crime.

    I would wager you think your all grown up but our family lives this daily,so mind your own business.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 13 You need to be logged in to vote
  313. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    muggins (1,840) Says:

    January 31st, 2013 at 3:35 pm
    Judith (1,207) Says:

    December 16th, 2012 at 9:37 am
    Chuck Bird (2,690) Says:
    December 16th, 2012 at 9:30 am

    ————————

    Was the animal hurt? Do teenagers dob mates in? As none of us were there, I don’t think anyone can make that sort of comment as there are no details. ‘He had sex with a goat’ – what kind of sex? The type is not clarified, was it fondling, intercourse, oral, etc etc. How can any person comment without knowing the exact details of the claim being made. Sex is a very big concept that can refer to a great number of behaviours and acts. I don’t think its a conversation any of us can justifiably get into with the limited information

    Judith,
    You mention the word sex three times.
    “He had sex with a goat, -what kind of sex?”
    ” Sex is a very big concept”.
    Don’t try to wriggle out of it.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  314. Psycho Milt (2,246 comments) says:

    Funny how these Bain threads always feature a lengthy argument about sex with goats. It’s almost as though muggins was deliberately baiting someone who never fails to rise to the bait.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  315. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    muggins (1,841) Says:

    January 31st, 2013 at 3:24 pm
    Judith (1,207) Says:

    December 15th, 2012 at 11:12 am
    Nookin (2,283) Says:
    December 15th, 2012 at 11:04 am

    ———–
    Sorry I actually read the question as Mark Buckley having the fantasy.

    Do I think Mark Buckley had sex with a goat? Factually how would I know? But I do know that it does and has happened, and probably more times than one would care to think about. It is possible, and I see no reason for David to lie. Lies are usually told for some advantage, and there was no advantage to anyone in that situation, so yes, I’d say I believe David

    Judith , here you do again.
    Do I think Mark Buckley had sex with a goat? Yes, I believe David.
    And you reckon it probably happens more times than we care to think about. Do you really believe that.?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  316. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    Psycho Milt (1,101) Says:

    January 31st, 2013 at 3:52 pm
    Funny how these Bain threads always feature a lengthy argument about sex with goats. It’s almost as though muggins was deliberately baiting someone who never fails to rise to the bait.

    Me bait someone? Never.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  317. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    Me thinks that thou protests too much. Who me? No ‘Judith’. ;)

    Think how much money the police and the justice system, well actually everybody could save if they all just listened to ‘Judith’.

    I look forward to the ‘Judithal Review’.

    Not ‘our’ Judith thou. The other one with ‘standing’.;)

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  318. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    lilman (348) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 3:47 pm

    ————————

    No, you are right, I don’t know you, and frankly from your irrational and emotive display, I wouldn’t want to. From what I can work out, I have never mentioned you, unless of course you are using more than one identity, and have made a bit of a slip up there. Or perhaps you are pretending to be someone else.

    Fact is, you are obviously a fruit loop who thinks comments on a blog are aimed specifically at you. Get help.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  319. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    muggins (1,843) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 3:55 pm
    ——————–

    You raised this topic again, not me.
    You have said clearly in the past that you do not believe David and you called him a liar over it. Those posts are still available on this blog. Now you change your story, and say you believe him. You think you are clever, all you are attempting to do is draw the attention away from the pending court case.

    The word is out from JFRB, change the subject and keep taking it back to other matters, don’t let the court case take prominence. Sorry, it’s not going to work.

    You are a nasty pathetic liar. The fact that people like Ross and Goldnkiwi support you, puts them in the same catagory as you.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  320. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    Category ;) Your slip is showing.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  321. Rowan (1,778 comments) says:

    Gamefisher @ 2.54
    You are deluded if you are still trying to argue that the shot to Robin was not a contact wound. Are you going to disagree with Dr Dempster on this one? also do you really believe that after shooting Robin David went out an shot an animal close contact or something in order to explain the blood in the barrell? Even the used car bumboy acknowledges it was a contact wound yet debating what is not a disputed fact anymore clearly shows your delusion. The other two pathologists testified that it was a distant/intermediate wound based on their photographic analysis only (while admitting this an unreliable method). The discovery of the blood in the barrel via Hentshels notes confirmed Dr Dempsters opinion and showed the other 2s analysis was rubbish.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  322. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    I for one have always found court cases interesting!!! I mean, lets be real here without court cases what would lawyers do?

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  323. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    It will be very interesting to see what David Farrer has to say on the inclusion of Prof. Joseph.

    I see in September 2010 David attended an event regarding Electoral Law Reform, in which David stated he “agreed with him on all points”. I wonder what he considers the value of Prof. Joseph’s contribution will be to the JR.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  324. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    Farrar, is that you ‘Judith’?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  325. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    Judith (1,215) Says:

    January 31st, 2013 at 4:19 pm
    muggins (1,843) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 3:55 pm
    ——————–

    You raised this topic again, not me.
    You have said clearly in the past that you do not believe David and you called him a liar over it. Those posts are still available on this blog. Now you change your story, and say you believe him. You think you are clever, all you are attempting to do is draw the attention away from the pending court case.

    The word is out from JFRB, change the subject and keep taking it back to other matters, don’t let the court case take prominence. Sorry, it’s not going to work.

    Judith, you are correct in that I have called David Bain a liar, as have thousands of other people.
    And I have also said I believe he is lying about that goat.
    But you say so far as you are concerned he is telling the truth about that goat.
    You also say you are not sure as to what sort of sex it was.
    You say was it oral, intercourse. or etc.,etc.
    Now you can either ask David, who will probably lie to you, or you can ask Mark Buckley, who will probably laugh in your face.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  326. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    Judith, you are correct in that I have called David Bain a liar, as have thousands of other people.

    You need to first understand the difference between “thousands of other people” saying something, and 15 people saying it thousands of times.
    Those 15 are simply trying to convince themselves, and each other, of what they already know are lies.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  327. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    muggins (1,844) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 5:02 pm

    ————————-

    No, I didn’t say I was not sure, please post where I have said that?

    In the post you have shown, I was raising the point that there are various kinds of acts of a sexual nature, and suggested some of what those can be considered, and asked the previous poster, what sort of sex they were referring to, and then a general comment about everyone discussing what that previous poster was meaning, when none of us could get into without knowing what sort of sex the previous poster was referring to.

    This is a perfect example where you take part of a conversation, and isolated one post and twisted it.

    It has been made perfectly clear to you a number of times, in posts you choose not to quote. All you have done is prove you cannot be trusted to relay details correctly, which indicates that all of these so called conversations you have with witnesses etc, are probably being manipulated in the same way, and that you cannot be trusted. You’ve ruined your own credibility by trying to score points against me..

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  328. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    Snap ;) lol
    By George I think he has got it………….. finally

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  329. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    @Judith. Read and learn, Judith:

    Over a river there was a very narrow bridge. One day a goat was crossing this bridge. Just at the middle of the bridge he met another goat. There was no room for them to pass. “Go back,” said one goat to the other, “there is no room for both of us”.

    “Why should I go back?”, said the other goat. “Why should not you go back?”

    ” You must go back”, said the first goat, “because I am stronger than you.”

    “You are not stronger than I”, said the second goat.

    “We will see about that”, said the first goat, and he put down his horns to fight.

    “Stop!”, said the second goat. ” If we fight, we shall both fall into the river and be drowned. Instead I have a plan- I shall lie down, and you may walk over me.”

    Then the wise goat lay down on the bridge, and the other goat walked lightly over him. So they passed each other, and went on their ways.

    Judith, the moral here is when you’ve lost, lie down and let us walk all over you.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  330. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Flipper 2.32

    Philip Joseph is certainly bringing in a lot of experience in specialist areas. His mere willingness to appear should be interpreted as to what extent David’s team anticipate arguing from the ‘rights’ point of view. It’s early days but we could be about to see a watershed case. Some commentators have speculated on an attempt at a ‘tactical breach’ (my words) from which there might be some leverage made in a pr sense. I don’t see that at all, the issues are too significant and potentially too far reaching to be somehow limited to the impression made on the wider public, it could be that true after all that Key didn’t realise how far into his Government this situation might reach and that he was simply arrogant about it in a way that most might perceive how a ‘discretion’ works, but shouldn’t work. In fact Collins have been very arrogant about it all, repeating time and time again the mantra of ‘whose’ decision it is. If it were that simple she wouldn’t have to keep repeating that point and might be more mindful of having been seen to be fair. As it is she has come across as acting with some disdain, often blaming DB for things and giving him ‘warnings.’ None of that is the work of the fair hand of a neutral arbiter. She has seemingly, deliberately, or ignorantly, avoided being seen to be fair and answered any hints of bias, or disquiet along the lines of whose decision it is.

    She’s recently commended herself for being ‘fair’ when most, not effected by ‘robinitis,’ most likely see her as being head strong which is an indication of what the Crown will take to Court. In fact ‘a fair judge’ would have avoided the Court like the plague and taken every step necessary to be seen as fair. Sitting down at the table with your ‘mates’ have secret meetings which exclude one party speaks for itself. It should be her that was speaking to the public about human rights, due process and leading the public through an understanding of what the issues from a human rights perspective were rather than being seen as ‘tough’ and ‘firm’ about who the decision maker was. I think that’s what many want to hear, an explanation of the term of imprisonment, the not guilty verdict and so on even if there might be a limit to the remedies some see David as having, then explaining those as well. By contrast would Chris Finlayson have led this situation to deteriorate to this point, or would he have worked to avoid it – we all know the answer to that. But what we don’t know is what a person faced with David’s situation can do when he virtually spat upon, threatened and warned, and what makes him a person who has less rights to remedy than others.

    I guess we are going to find that out one way or another but it could be a big pandora’s box that’s been opened.

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  331. Nookin (3,031 comments) says:

    “By contrast would Chris Finlayson have led this situation to deteriorate to this point, or would he have worked to avoid it –”

    It seems that Finlayson did support the review

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/8070186/Collins-points-to-alleged-Bain-report-errors

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  332. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    Kanz (834) Says:

    January 31st, 2013 at 5:14 pm
    Judith, you are correct in that I have called David Bain a liar, as have thousands of other people.

    You need to first understand the difference between “thousands of other people” saying something, and 15 people saying it thousands of times.
    Those 15 are simply trying to convince themselves, and each other, of what they already know are lies.

    I could have said hundred of thousands.
    I don’t reckon there are too many adult New Zealanders who don’t know that David Bain lied about those glasses.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  333. corrigenda (142 comments) says:

    I note the following in the press release:

    Mr Karam said it was that secrecy that Mr Bain wanted the ……..

    Today, Mr Karam said Mr Bain’s legal team…..

    Yesterday, Mr Karam said Mr Bain had been ………

    …..this judicial review,” Mr Karam said.

    Funnily enough I was looking for a statement somewhere that “Mr David Bain said” But I did see in another article where Mr David Bain said he wasn’t interested in pursuing the claim. So just who is it that is looking for money if not Mr David Bain???

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  334. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    Nookin (2,383) Says:

    January 31st, 2013 at 5:30 pm
    “By contrast would Chris Finlayson have led this situation to deteriorate to this point, or would he have worked to avoid it –”

    It seems that Finlayson did support the review

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/8070186/Collins-points-to-alleged-Bain-report-errors

    So shouldn’t Karam be going after Finlayson and Heron as well?

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  335. Truthiz (185 comments) says:

    Well, still here …

    What would possess a person to stay in their little box on a beautiful day like today.

    You need to look at the big picture people …… :)

    .
    No one cares what you write or how strong your belief in that is.

    Just remember David Bain wrote the note on the computer, thats all you need.

    hmmm, think some home made eggburgers are on the menu and if you are looking for me, I’ll be under the fejoia tree with a cold brew …. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  336. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Nookin (2,383) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 5:30 pm
    “By contrast would Chris Finlayson have led this situation to deteriorate to this point, or would he have worked to avoid it –”

    It seems that Finlayson did support the review

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/8070186/Collins-points-to-alleged-Bain-report-errors

    I asked if he would have led the situation to deteriorate to this point.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  337. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    Judith (1,216) Says:

    January 31st, 2013 at 5:17 pm
    muggins (1,844) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 5:02 pm

    ————————-

    No, I didn’t say I was not sure, please post where I have said that?

    In the post you have shown, I was raising the point that there are various kinds of acts of a sexual nature, and suggested some of what those can be considered, and asked the previous poster, what sort of sex they were referring to, and then a general comment about everyone discussing what that previous poster was meaning, when none of us could get into without knowing what sort of sex the previous poster was referring to.

    Judith,when you asked the question
    “Was it oral, intercourse,or etc,etc?”, I took that to mean you were not sure what sort of sex you believed Mark Buckley had with that goat.
    Are you now saying you are sure? How are you sure? Did David tell you?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  338. Nookin (3,031 comments) says:

    It’s is a moot point. Collins clearly consulted Finlayson and Heron. Is it reasonable to assume that the discussion involved the process and who would be involved?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  339. gamefisher (416 comments) says:

    Rowan 4:26

    Firstly you people pick and chose the experts that suit your views.
    The question I have is what did Dr Dempter use as a reference or test did he do to make his evaluation on because
    1. It is very unusual for suicides to be done with subsonic.22
    2. This silencer was unique to NZ

    Normally it would be highly improbable that blood could get that far (80mm) but that that rifle was miss feeding (jamming) leaving the breech open and allowing some of the gases to escape in the direction of the breech up the barrel. With the silencer outlet not being blocked that would be 20%-30% of the gases escaping in the direction of breech but if the silencer was blocked by a contact to skin that percentage would be much greater depending on length of time of contact. The higher percentage of gas escaping equals to a higher likelihood of blood being carried further.

    That actually point more to murder than suicide because there was that misfed bullet beside the rifle.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 13 You need to be logged in to vote
  340. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    gamefisher (372) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 5:46 pm
    Rowan 4:26

    Firstly you people pick and chose the experts that suit your views.
    ———————-

    Like you and your JFRB/Counterspin/Freeforums friends don’t do that too?

    Keep it at least partially realistic!

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  341. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Nookin (2,384) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 5:46 pm
    It’s is a moot point. Collins clearly consulted Finlayson and Heron. Is it reasonable to assume that the discussion involved the process and who would be involved?”

    Possibly, it will likely come out perhaps.
    Thinking about it yes, as unbelievable as it seems to me. Probably key as well.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  342. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    A little bit a amazing to see gf arguing about the dna inside the rifle when the party line for so long was that it didn’t exist.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  343. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    corrigenda (72) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 5:35 pm
    ————————

    You clearly have little understanding of why people appoint representation.
    It is so they don’t have to make those statements themselves.

    It is used by many people, however, you won’t admit that, because you and your 14 mates like to pick pick pick, hoping that pointing out such things will have some sort of influence on the overall process. In reality the only thing it does is add to the argument, that Ms Collins is being influenced by a small group of unbalanced individuals from the JFRB/Counterspin members.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  344. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    marzuka (6) Says:

    January 31st, 2013 at 1:07 am
    In reply to Judith.

    Judith
    Even I, with my limited graphics experience know that photos can be manipulated to make anything fit within a defined area. Hence your photos of the foot prints mean nothing.

    So you’re cofident David’s actual toeless measurement contradict my analysis.
    Judith
    You do not have the original negative, or photo to work from, therefore, you do not know whether your sizing is correct etc etc.

    Does one need negative to know that david’s foot was 300mm lengthwise as per sclae in my picture? That toeless print was 240mm as per scale in my picture? Are you saying my scales are flawed ie the RELATIVE measures 300/240/280/20 are not proportionate?

    https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-26HtE3L6n_Q/UOaKqJ2Lv1I/AAAAAAAABjs/ZX1GBHAK58k/s1200/bain%252520footprint6b.jpg
    Judith
    So sorry, no points there at all.

    Do I get points for the right measurements? What about points for mooting the possibility thats david’s toeless foot is of order 240mm?
    Judith
    Oh yeah, and at least two of the photos you have used for the blood prints are not the ones used in court. are they from the scene.

    Which two? Are they relevant to the issue of david’s foot size? Is foot size relevant to this case?

    So given onus on David to prove himself, you’d agree with me would be cool to see toeless foot right? Should get the truth to get some papparazzi shots of the foot in question for a front page exclusive lol….
    Judith
    Your last example using the defenses scenario, is NOT using the defenses scenario at all, and makes no account for the positioning of the blood spatter on Robin Bain.

    The last sim is not the defence scenario it is Robin avoiding murder, maybe you’re refering to the spaghetti modes which are probably more physically compatible with defense lol?

    The defense maintains that Robin Bain was standing with his right leg bent at the knee and foot on the chair, he was standing in front of, not next too. The left leg was straight. This position is supported by the multi-directional pattern of the blood spatter. With this position, as the body collapsed, the right leg on the chair would interfere with the forwards movement, and eventually take the body backwards and result in it falling to the right.

    I’ve actually simulated that too. With respect to that was hoping you would offer you views regarding this, which I’ll add to the simulation so everyone can compare with actual simulation results.

    Anyways, as per defenses scenario what’s:

    Robin’s initial centre of mass velocity/height/distance for curtain.
    Robin’s final centre of mass delta ie difference from initial.
    robin’s peak centre of mass velocity.
    Also is Robin’s centre of mass closer to the curtain with his leg lift up on chair or with it straight down.

    I’ll called this Sim example “Judith Rocks!”
    Judith
    You also fail to account for the trajectory of the bullet.

    My sim lets you shoot at any angle try direction mode. The gun is initialised to to left and up ie biased to favour defense but doesn’t show in psuedo recoil modes – again opt for directional to see where pointing and use keys to reposition if want.

    Which whilst not making a huge different in the direction of the body, when applied to the head, slightly alters the centre of body mass, and influences the direction of collapse. (No, body’s do not ‘fly across rooms when shot). Also, where you have the body does not explain the blood spatter pattern on the curtains.

    So your determination of the head position in my sim is what in height/distance from curtain in metres?

    The final position of Robin’s body is actual no more than 30cms from where he stood. Your photos are taken from an angle that does not show that, but video and other photos demonstrate it nicely.

    So you are saying the final Centre of Mass position is only 30cm for inital centre of mass? You agree centre of mass is of crucial physical relevance right?

    Your so called ”indentation” , is typical on any person who has worn glasses for sometime, of which the nose arch pads fit snuggly. It remains permanently even when the glasses are removed and not worn for sometime. What were you trying to proof, that David Bain wore glasses? We knew that already. I have such an indentation, but I only wear glasses for distance viewing, so when watching TV. The majority of my work is up close reading, computer work, talking to people etc. So even though I wear glasses no more than 10% of the day, and sometimes not for several days, that mark remains. Not obvious until you look close, just like the one you point out, but certainly not a sign of being in any struggle with a person.

    permanently? Hmmm that’s not what I’ve noticed on myself or others which I tested. Do your sock marks persist permanently too? So given you yourself implicitly concur he has mark consistent with wearing glasses and given the onus in on david is to prove his his innocence, it would be a reasonably legitimate test to remove his glasses for a few days to rule out the possibility right?
    Judith
    I too, even as an amateur could play around with photos and come up with what you have. Be proud of the fact that you can, but in all honesty, what you have produced is not supported by the factual evidence. I suggest you actually source the original photos (oh wait you can’t the police threw them out).

    So the photos aren’t evidence of anything unless they’re originals? and any marks, bruises correlations in such photos aren’t evidence either? Does adding actual qualifying measurements from expert testimony give any evidentiary weight to non original photos?
    Judith
    As far as your David behind the curtain video. That completely opposes both the trajectory and the blood spatter on Robin, and also the blood spatter on the curtains.

    How?
    Judith
    I have told you before, if you can’t match it to the actual physical blood spatter etc, you’ve wasted your time

    Actually I have a blood splatter model too – which you obviously haven’t seen – that is why I mentioned it in my previous post about where the lines correlating blood splatter end up in my graphic you used.- Anyways, thanks again though for using my pathetic graphic attempts,I am honoured.

    Cheerio

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  345. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    More spam.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  346. Rowan (1,778 comments) says:

    Gamefisher
    you are clearly deluded. Dr Dempster did the post mortem and was of the view from day one that it was a close contact wound. That has never changed, as he is a crown witness and there is no evidence to suggest he was wrong then it is likely that he is correct. The blood in the barrell was caused by blowback from the last firing of the rifle. It could only have got there if the rifle was very close to Robins temple. On EITHER scenario suicide or murder Robin was the last person to die therefore his blood therefore contact wound BRD (or any doubt whatsoever)
    There are no ‘rules’ homicides ie the type of ammunition to use or whether or not to use silencers. Irrelevant and doesn’t get you anywhere, similarly the ‘depth’ of the blood is irrelevant. You have no explanations consistent with murder yet you marginalise and pretend it doesn’t exist all the evidence in the lounge that clearly points to suicide.
    Nice try the misfed bullet points to ‘murder’ did Daddy just stand there in wait with leg bent at the knee raised on the chair while David cleared the bullet, reloaded and shot again
    Probability of this like all your other explanations to date 0.0000%

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  347. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    About the same as you spelling barrel correctly.
    I guess it shows that I read the ‘opinion’. ;)

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 13 You need to be logged in to vote
  348. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Nostalgia-NZ (2,715) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 6:03 pm
    More spam.
    ———————–

    Leave him too it, he is actually proving the point being made elsewhere. ;-)

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  349. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    I must just thank cybernana for pointing me over to this blog.

    Thanks Nana ;)

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 13 You need to be logged in to vote
  350. corrigenda (142 comments) says:

    Judith (1,219) Says:

    January 31st, 2013 at 6:01 pm
    corrigenda (72) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 5:35 pm
    ————————

    You clearly have little understanding of why people appoint representation.
    It is so they don’t have to make those statements themselves.

    Appointed by or is that self appointed?? As I said earlier, AAT NEVER refused to answer questions from the media. David Bain is not allowed to and we all saw on NZ and Australian TV where Joe Karam said “David doesn’t know the evidence” when he was asked a simple question. Is it because they are scared he will suffer from foot in mouth??

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  351. Truthiz (185 comments) says:

    and we all saw on NZ and Australian TV where Joe Karam said “David doesn’t know the evidence” when he was asked a simple question

    Lol. there are some classic lines out there ….

    Maybe someone should compile a list of Davids bizarre responses …. :)

    ahhh d burgers were great, time to settle in the shade again.

    You guys keep on working …. lol

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  352. gamefisher (416 comments) says:

    Rowan 6:09 quote”Nice try the misfed bullet points to ‘murder’ did Daddy just stand there in wait with leg bent at the knee raised on the chair while David cleared the bullet, reloaded and shot again” unquote

    Do you know the difference between a misfire and a misfeed as there is no mention of misfires in any of the evidence I have read but I suspect this is just another one of your myth perpetuations. Have you seen marzukas

    http://marzuka.x10.mx/trademe/javascript/bain%20sim%201.06/bain%20sim.htm

    note the red dot that is the centre of mass so how did Robin get so far away from the blood on the curtain?

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  353. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    AAT NEVER refused to answer questions from the media. David Bain is not allowed to…

    Well, quite. Karam and Reed clearly don’t trust David not to stuff up. David told Melanie Reid that it was his “core belief” that he didn’t kill his family. He also told her that even if he was guilty, he’d served 13 years and should be able to “get on with life”. I’m sure Karam et al were disappointed and surprised by these statements.

    Then David told Binnie that he hadn’t driven the car that fateful weekend…a deliberate lie. He also said:

    The only thing I can reiterate is that these five members of my family were my life. They were part of who I was. We were extremely close. We all loved each other dearly.

    That of course is garbage. David hated his father.

    Then David said he hadn’t worn his mother’s glasses, another lie.

    David cannot be trusted to tell the truth. Is it any wonder that Karam doesn’t allow David to be interviewed!

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 14 You need to be logged in to vote
  354. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    All joking aside, I know why I have the time to ‘devote’ here, but I would hate to think that some others are being paid a wage by some poor unsuspecting Government Department or other employer. ;)

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 13 You need to be logged in to vote
  355. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Do you think anybody takes that seriously gf, except the desperate nutters?
    I guess the point hasn’t been made to chrissie, poxie and the sisters that the case has moved to another stage, and it’s not about trying to re-litigate a failed prosecution with photo shopped daydreams.

    The High Court has been asked to rule on procedure, natural justice and a ‘few’ other issues. I know it must be hard to turn your attention elsewhere when you feel you’ve made breakthrough, like all the other failed breakthroughs – but it doesn’t matter at this point.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  356. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    goldnkiwi (166) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 6:53 pm
    All joking aside, I know why I have the time to ‘devote’ here, but I would hate to think that some others are being paid a wage by some poor unsuspecting Government Department or other employer. ‘

    Who are you stalking now?

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  357. gamefisher (416 comments) says:

    Nostalgia-NZ 5:59 quote “A little bit a amazing to see gf arguing about the dna inside the rifle when the party line for so long was that it didn’t exist. ”unquote

    That because I don’t have the trial transcript and I know that it was virtually impossible for blood to get into the barrel if there is a bullet in the breech. I realised last week that there was the possibility that if the breech was open after a close contact or contact shot the behaviour of the gases would allow them to expel up the barrel we know that Laniet had a contact shot and it is debatable just how close Robin was.

    If there it is true there was blood in the barrel I am personally appalled that it wasn’t tested for Dna because it should have been as it was one of the most crucial pieces of evidence.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  358. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    @gamefisher. It’s obvious to anyone with any knowledge that Robin died instantly by the curtains and couldn’t have fallen where he was found.

    Robin was lifted up under the shoulders, spilling blood onto the curtains, as Ferris said, and lugged over to the beanbag to make it look like suicide. Killer put rifle in the wrong place, magazine in the wrong place. Should have left Robin where he was. Didn’t know of course Reed QC would show jury Robin dying there, leg on chair, gun held accurately to temple, but not by muzzle (silencer/modifier/suppressor) because he didn’t want to disturb Stephen’s pristine prints there. Or leave a print. Bugger.

    Oh, well, as my old grandmother used to say, “There’s a fool born every minute.”

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 13 You need to be logged in to vote
  359. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Actually ross you are the one that cannot be trusted to tell the truth, as you show with every post.
    Don’t you have another subject than proving your are a gutless wonder?
    No, didn’t think so. Well why not attack Binnie again, you can’t have done that more than a few thousand times. Or why not go the full hog and explain why you’re such a daddy fan, in a 1,000 words or less.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 13 You need to be logged in to vote
  360. gamefisher (416 comments) says:

    Nostalgia-NZ quote”The High Court has been asked to rule on procedure, natural justice and a ‘few’ other issues.”unquote

    I other word it will rule on ‘letter of the law’ and not on the ‘intent of the law’

    And where is the ‘natural justice’ for Robin Bain and his family I find it very hypocritical to call for ‘natural justice’ for D Bain and yet accuse Robin for crimes he has not committed

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 13 You need to be logged in to vote
  361. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Okay have it your own way gf, there is no blood in the barrel – the evidence posted on here was counterfeit.
    I can’t be bothered going in endless circles about facts compared to fantasys. Belief what you want.

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  362. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Oh no, spelling mistakes!

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  363. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    ‘And where is the ‘natural justice’ for Robin Bain and his family I find it very hypocritical to call for ‘natural justice’ for D Bain and yet accuse Robin for crimes he has not committed’

    That’s the essence of this case gf, I didn’t make the rules or the evidence. Get over yourself.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  364. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    A lot more than spelling mistakes ;)

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 13 You need to be logged in to vote
  365. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    You seem to have overlooked the question about who you are stalking now at 7.08?

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  366. Rowan (1,778 comments) says:

    Gamefisher
    Misfire/misfeed whatever, no I haven’t read the marzuka explanations and can’t be bothered doing so, you are over complicating things, close contact wound as proven by blood in the barrel, we have been over the position of the body in relation to the curtains, I will regard Dr Dempsters evidence over yours he didn’t think there was anything unnatural with the position of the body, you are the one perpatrating the ’3 body length/metre’ myth
    Yes crimes Daddy ‘didn’t commit’ your alternative explanations are as usual 0.0000% you can’t even get the basics right!
    Do you have any other evidence that the Robin shot was not close contact than Thompson and Ferris’s discredited photo analysis? no didn’t think so!

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  367. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    @Nosty. ” … fantasys. Belief what you want.” (The degradation in your English suggests you might be getting bored.)

    Want to talk about the goat?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  368. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    corrigenda (73) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 6:42 pm

    As I said earlier, AAT NEVER refused to answer questions from the media
    ——————————-

    That is another lie. AAT actually refused to have anything to do with one major paper, and appointed his ex-wife’s uncle as spokes person for him in most matters. AAT has given very few interviews to the media, and avoids the media as much as possible, having a mistrust in most of them for the way they reported his case initially.

    I’m not sure where you get your facts from because they are certainly not from reality.

    Oh yeah, and AAT is a great supporter of David Bain and his bid for compensation. Both David and Joe have been included in the Thomas family celebrations since David’s acquittal, and unlike the propaganda distributed by JFRB members, they are still on ‘speaking terms’.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  369. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Oh, well, as my old grandmother used to say, “There’s a fool born every minute.”

    At the time of your birth of course Dennis.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  370. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    And where is the ‘natural justice’ for Robin Bain and his family I find it very hypocritical to call for ‘natural justice’ for D Bain and yet accuse Robin for crimes he has not committed

    gamefisher, this may come as a surprise to you.
    Nobody posting on here, not Bain, not his defence team, no supporter of Bain accused the old man of one of those crimes you mention.
    It was his two Daughters who did that. Laniet and Arawa.
    Do we believe them, or the dirty, smelly, unhinged old man who killed them, their Mother and Brother?

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  371. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    Nostalgia-NZ (2,722) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 7:48 pm
    You seem to have overlooked the question about who you are stalking now at 7.08?
    Vote: 0 1

    A question, sorry I thought you were trying to tell me that I was right. At least I am not being a) paid to be on here or b) stealing time from an employer or c) on here as am unemployable due to past mistakes. Take your pick. ;)

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 13 You need to be logged in to vote
  372. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    I’m not sure where you get your facts from because they are certainly not from reality.

    Judith, I gave you credit for having some smarts, was I wrong?
    It is obvious where his/her ‘facts’ come from. The blog of lies, AKA counterspin.

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  373. Rowan (1,778 comments) says:

    Kanz
    Aren’t you aware everyone is a liar to these gutless wonders that includes the deceased Arawa and Laniet Bain, there allegations were clearly ‘fanciful’, of course Daddy wasn’t doing anything that has been suggested!

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  374. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    Nosty. A bit under the belt, eh, old son? I would never be so personal.

    Natural justice? I prefer the Chinese approach to natural justice. It’s coming our way sometime soon. Quick. Cheap. Final. No compensation.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  375. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    My pick is the normal stalking begun by Annie. You know Annie don’t you?
    You’ve told the board of your LLB, that isn’t a licence to stalk is it?
    Try showing some fortitude and not trying to back out of your 7.08.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  376. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Kanz (836) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 7:58 pm
    ——————-
    yes, you are possibly right. For some reason they didn’t strike me as intelligent enough to decipher such as jumbled and messy site, let alone understand anything that was scribbled there.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  377. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Dennis Horne (564) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 8:02 pm
    Nosty. A bit under the belt, eh, old son? I would never be so personal.

    Natural justice? I prefer the Chinese approach to natural justice. It’s coming our way sometime soon. Quick. Cheap. Final. No compensation.’

    Don’t be such a wimp Denny.
    Then again it suits you.

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  378. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    Nostalgia-NZ (2,724) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 8:03 pm

    My pick is the normal stalking begun by Annie. You know Annie don’t you?
    You’ve told the board of your LLB, that isn’t a licence to stalk is it?
    Try showing some fortitude and not trying to back out of your 7.08.

    She is obviously stalking some of the twisted sisters group. I know of no Bain supporter who fits any of these descriptions.

    At least I am not being a) paid to be on here or b) stealing time from an employer or c) on here as am unemployable due to past mistakes. Take your pick.

    I hope they know about her leaking this information.

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  379. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    yes, you are possibly right. For some reason they didn’t strike me as intelligent enough to decipher such as jumbled and messy site, let alone understand anything that was scribbled there.

    Of course they don’t understand it. They don’t need understanding to repeat it, as we have seen with muggins and his spamming, they have learned to C&P nothing more, nothing less.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  380. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    Nostalgia-NZ (2,725) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 8:03 pm
    My pick is the normal stalking begun by Annie. You know Annie don’t you?
    You’ve told the board of your LLB, that isn’t a licence to stalk is it?
    Try showing some fortitude and not trying to back out of your 7.08

    More delusional than normal, who is Annie? You must be confusing me with someone else.
    Just goes to show that wild guesses can be pretty close to the mark.

    Nothing like a ‘stab’ in the dark eh. ;)

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 14 You need to be logged in to vote
  381. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    I’m not confusing you with anybody, I’m pointing out your continued stalking.
    Nothing like a donkey in the barn eh?

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  382. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    @Nosty. Ah, that’s more the real Nosty. By the way, I haven’t noticed any comment on my opinion: when shot dead Robin would drop where he was like a piece of meat. What say, you?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 14 You need to be logged in to vote
  383. Jacob Cohen (44 comments) says:

    Judith 10.44am today – Because the process was incorrect, the result was incorrect. He was imprisoned by a judicial process that effectively when declared a miscarriage of justice, ceased to exist. Therefore, he was not a guilty man or had ever been a guilty man. Therefore his imprisonment was wrong – wrongfully imprisoned.
    The miscarriage of justice does not say, “well he was guilty and not [now] he is not” It says he was never guilty in the first place, effectively what happened didn’t happen, because the judicial process that ‘appeared to make it happen’ wasn’t a judicial process, and the conviction doesn’t exist and never did because of that.

    So David Bain wasn’t dealt with by a judicial process in the first trial, but still went to jail for nearly 13 years.
    I think this is a little more difficult for Collins to explain to the masses than any of the lapses she discovered in the Binnie report.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  384. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    Who is Annie?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 14 You need to be logged in to vote
  385. Truthiz (185 comments) says:

    Nothing like a ‘stab’ in the dark eh.

    .

    Classic

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 14 You need to be logged in to vote
  386. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Dennis Horne (565) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 8:15 pm
    @Nosty. Ah, that’s more the real Nosty. By the way, I haven’t noticed any comment on my opinion: when shot dead Robin would drop where he was like a piece of meat. What say, you?’

    I’ve said it a lot of times before Dennis, no use debating the same things already decided. I don’t want to be rude but the sisters arguments have not progressed an inch over the top of the same cauldron they have been stirring for years.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  387. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    Who is Annie?

    I think that’s what muggins calls his goat.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  388. Truthiz (185 comments) says:

    Just remember people,

    David Bain wrote the note on the computer, thats all you really need to know …. :)

    As the sun sets on this beautiful day, how many of you got outside and actually enjoyed the day.

    :)

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 11 Thumb down 14 You need to be logged in to vote
  389. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Kanz (838) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 8:08 pm
    —————————

    She’s just following instructions from guilty.freeforums. They have been working for the last couple of weeks to try and establish who everyone is. They have come up with several things they think may be associated to some of the David Bain supporters and she has come in to do the dirty work to see if she can get a bite. They have also made a few inquiries from other sources. All a bit sick, but hey, it keeps her off the streets.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  390. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Truthiz (139) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 8:24 pm
    Just remember people,

    David Bain wrote the note on the computer, thats all you really need to know ….

    As the sun sets on this beautiful day, how many of you got outside and actually enjoyed the day.’

    Just remember you are still are a gutless wonder.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  391. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    I prefer to accept the evidence of those that where there just after the murders,rather than those that came along later looking at photos,which,as Joe Karam said to Michael Laws in their debate “The experts all agree that looking at photos is fraught with danger”.
    So as an impartial observer I accept that Dr Dempster is probably correct when he said that wound to Robin Bain’s head was a close contact wound and that blood found in the silencer barrel, even though there was no DNA result, was probably Robin Bain’s blood.
    By the same token I also accept that there was blood on David Bain’s fingers when he placed them on the rifle, as testified by Kim Jones, the police fingerprint expert.
    So the question is was that Stephen’s blood, or was that rabbits blood.
    Bain told Binnie it must have been rabbits blood, but I am almost certain it would have been Stephen’s blood, seeing as all the other blood on the rifle that tested positive for DNA was accepted as being Stephen’s blood.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 14 You need to be logged in to vote
  392. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    goldnkiwi (170) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 8:17 pm

    You know Annie, she hangs around with the alterego golfergold, blossom, etc. You’ve been talking to them and you can’t remember who they are? What are you drinking?

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  393. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    @Nostalgia. Oh yes they have Nosty, made progress. If he could have, Key would have paid the freak. Now, no court is going to stop the government governing. Caterpillar Karam won’t be pushing Crusher Collins anywhere. Noah’s Ark is going to sink out of sight. That’s Noah Fuckall, by the way. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 13 You need to be logged in to vote
  394. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    Now I know for a fact you do not know any of the things you claim lol, when am I supposed to have talked to these people? ;)

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  395. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    goldnkiwi (171) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 8:34 pm

    ———————

    That’s for me to know, and to pass on for those who need to see. ;-)

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  396. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Dennis Horne (566) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 8:34 pm
    @Nostalgia. Oh yes they have Nosty, made progress. If he could have, Key would have the freak. Now, no court is going to stop the government governing. Caterpillar Karam won’t be pushing Crusher Collins anywhere. Noah’s Ark is going to sink out of sight. That’s Noah Fuckall, by the way’

    Tallyho old chap, looks like you hardly missed a bean.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  397. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    @Nosty. “Tallyho old chap, looks like you hardly missed a bean.”

    Thanks, old bean. A target for you. Oops, missed…

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 15 You need to be logged in to vote
  398. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    Tallyho old chap, looks like you hardly missed a bean.

    When God handed out Brains, Dennis thought he said pains, and said “I don’t want any, thanks”.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  399. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    goldnkiwi (171) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 8:34 pm
    Now I know for a fact you do not know any of the things you claim lol, when am I supposed to have talked to these people?’

    How amazing, it all just happened – uet so many times.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  400. gamefisher (416 comments) says:

    Kanz 7:55 quote”gamefisher, this may come as a surprise to you.
    Nobody posting on here, not Bain, not his defence team, no supporter of Bain accused the old man of one of those crimes you mention.
    It was his two Daughters who did that. Laniet and Arawa.
    Do we believe them, or the dirty, smelly, unhinged old man who killed them, their Mother and Brother?
    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1″unquote

    So you are saying Robin didn’t suicide and murder because those are crimes I am talking about and there is a book accusing him of those crime and now we have this ‘natural justice’ for D Bain being bandied about that is BS.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 14 You need to be logged in to vote
  401. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    Kanz. And when God said “Kanz” he really said “Kuntz”. :)

    And that’s Nostalgia you are quoting. :) :) :)

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 14 You need to be logged in to vote
  402. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Dennis Horne (567) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 8:45 pm
    @Nosty. “Tallyho old chap, looks like you hardly missed a bean.”

    Thanks, old bean. A target for you. Oops, missed…’

    Noticed that Denny, maybe you could try crying into a bucket

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  403. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    Nostalgia-NZ (2,730) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 8:47 pm
    goldnkiwi (171) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 8:34 pm
    Now I know for a fact you do not know any of the things you claim lol, when am I supposed to have talked to these people?’

    How amazing, it all just happened – uet(sic) or is that sick ;) so many times.

    Really? Do tell.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 16 You need to be logged in to vote
  404. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    So you are saying Robin didn’t suicide and murder because those are crimes I am talking about and there is a book accusing him of those crime and now we have this ‘natural justice’ being bandied about that is BS.

    He did those alright.
    You needn’t bother yourself about him receiving natural justice. He dispensed that himself, with a .22 bullet into his own temple.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  405. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Nostalgia-NZ (2,731) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 8:47 pm

    ——————
    and yet she rushed straight over, and logged in.

    Great name for a forum that one, guilty!

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  406. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    I am waiting.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 14 You need to be logged in to vote
  407. gamefisher (416 comments) says:

    Nostalgia-NZ 7:40 pm

    quote”Okay have it your own way gf, there is no blood in the barrel – the evidence posted on here was counterfeit.
    I can’t be bothered going in endless circles about facts compared to fantasys. Belief what you want.”unquote

    You are the one that had harped on about the blood being Robins Dna all I have done is show there in an alternative & plausible way the blood could of got there. Apart from the subjective and unreliable estimation of death time based from the feel of an ambulance officer there is nothing that could exclude that blood in the barrel being Laniet,s.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 16 You need to be logged in to vote
  408. Truthiz (185 comments) says:

    Just remember you are still are a gutless wonder.

    Nay, gutless wonders use knives on unarmed people and shoot innocent females and in this particular case, a 22 rifle against his whole family.

    .
    But you have not got a thing right since you have been posting Brian, so why start now … :)

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 15 You need to be logged in to vote
  409. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    Judith (1,225) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 8:59 pm
    Nostalgia-NZ (2,731) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 8:47 pm

    ——————
    and yet she rushed straight over, and logged in.

    Great name for a forum that one, guilty!
    …………………
    Liar lol,

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 15 You need to be logged in to vote
  410. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Oh look the LLB has gone from stalking for the moment, to asking questions. How fascinating, and how does the story build back from there, to the usual insanity?

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  411. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Just remember you are still are a gutless wonder.

    Nay, gutless wonders use knives on unarmed people and shoot innocent females and in this particular case, a 22 rifle against his whole family.

    .
    But you have not got a thing right since you have been posting Brian, so why start now …’

    Don’t be a gutless wonder, if you think you know me why not reveal your own sad self?
    Apparently DPF hasn’t heard from you, not hiding away are you – sweetie?

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  412. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    goldnkiwi (174) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 9:01 pm

    ——————-
    Oh, did you think I was talking about you?

    Sorry, it’s not ‘all ’bout you’!

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  413. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    goldnkiwi (174) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 9:01 pm
    Judith (1,225) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 8:59 pm
    Nostalgia-NZ (2,731) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 8:47 pm

    ——————
    and yet she rushed straight over, and logged in.

    Great name for a forum that one, guilty!
    …………………
    Liar lol,
    Vote: 0 1
    ……………..

    That is the first time I have caught you out on an outright lie lol

    Thanks for that. ;)

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 15 You need to be logged in to vote
  414. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    Robin was shot dead and dropped like a piece of meat over by the curtains. His killer picked him up under the shoulders, shaking blood onto the curtains, and lugged his corpse over to the beanbag, where he dumped him. He placed the magazine on its edge right by his outstretched hand, the rifle alongside, to make it look like suicide. It fooled the police for a while, until they realised it was a scene-set.

    Robin would naturally have held the suppressor to guide the muzzle to his temple, but Stephen’s pristine prints were there, so he didn’t. He didn’t want to disturb them. Nor did he want to leave any prints on the rifle. That way we might think his arsehole son, who habitually locked him out of the lounge/computer alcove, was a murdering freak. Not me, of course. It is my core belief I was not there.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 14 You need to be logged in to vote
  415. gamefisher (416 comments) says:

    quote”He did those alright.
    You needn’t bother yourself about him receiving natural justice. He dispensed that himself, with a .22 bullet into his own temple.”

    Then he gently went for a walk over to the bean bag, making sure no blood got spilt on the carpet, lay his hand down gently down beside the previously placed the magazine on it curved edge, making sure not to knock it over even though in great pain.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 13 You need to be logged in to vote
  416. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Gee Dennis, you nearly got a start from getting off 0.00000%
    I guess that is something.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  417. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    Anyone know if David has sued Truth for calling him a liar? Surely Truth has defamed poor David. So, will David sue, or will he assume that his reputation is already in tatters and decide it’s not worth it? It is my core belief he won’t sue because he really is a liar…

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 14 You need to be logged in to vote
  418. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    Pretty much seems to be about me lol sweetie.

    What was that about stabbing and shooting? Am I in the right blog?

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 13 You need to be logged in to vote
  419. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    So David Bain wasn’t dealt with by a judicial process in the first trial, but still went to jail for nearly 13 years. I think this is a little more difficult for Collins to explain to the masses than any of the lapses she discovered in the Binnie report.

    Is that your core belief?

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 14 You need to be logged in to vote
  420. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Yawn folks, except for the gutless wonder, keep up your self-manipulations. Hope it works for you. Maybe by the time you work out which way up is, the JR review will be under way and you’ll be able to say – ‘that’s an injustice, because I was meddling with myself, in the normal fashion, and didn’t know it was going on.’ How great for the sisters.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  421. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    goldnkiwi (175) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 9:06 pm

    That is the first time I have caught you out on an outright lie lol

    Thanks for that.

    —————————-

    Just because you think the comment was about you deary.

    It wasn’t.

    The person it was aimed at, rushed straight over and logged in. She then left again without posting.

    Like I said ’tis not all bout you’, you are in fact, a nobody in the bigger picture.

    A mere donkey, doing the work of others and in a good position to use for bait. ;-) It worked.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  422. Truthiz (185 comments) says:

    Apparently DPF hasn’t heard from you, not hiding away are you – sweetie?

    Ha ha, drives you nuts, don’t it baby ….. :)

    .

    btw, they can actually remove that pipe from your arse if u enquire at the hospital, make a change from bubba, eh pussy.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 15 You need to be logged in to vote
  423. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Donkeys these days.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  424. Truthiz (185 comments) says:

    Anyone know if David has sued Truth for calling him a liar? Surely Truth has defamed poor David. So, will David sue, or will he assume that his reputation is already in tatters and decide it’s not worth it? It is my core belief he won’t sue because he really is a liar…

    Classic

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 15 You need to be logged in to vote
  425. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    Anyone know if David has sued Truth for calling him a liar? Surely Truth has defamed poor David.

    Why would he? Defamation is a statement that tends to lower a person in the estimation of right-thinking members of society, no right-thinking member of any society would read that trash, so no case.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  426. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Kanz (842) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 9:24 pm

    Why would he? Defamation is a statement that tends to lower a person in the estimation of right-thinking members of society, no right-thinking member of any society would read that trash, so no case.

    —————————-
    Well obviously Truthiz and Ross do, so I think your point is proven.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  427. Rowan (1,778 comments) says:

    Gamefisher @ 9.00
    Try using logic and common sense. The scenario and resulting probability you gave being as usual 0.0000% likely, are you really as stupid as your post suggests. Robin was the last to die under either scenario. The chance of it being anything other than a contact wound or anyone elses blood being the same.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  428. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Truthiz (141) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 9:18 pm
    Apparently DPF hasn’t heard from you, not hiding away are you – sweetie?

    Ha ha, drives you nuts, don’t it baby …..

    .

    btw, they can actually remove that pipe from your arse if u enquire at the hospital, make a change from bubba, eh pussy.’

    Typical daddy fan, pure gutless wonders. Some might think they’d front up.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  429. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    Kanz (842) Says: January 31st, 2013 at 9:24 pm
    “Anyone know if David has sued Truth for calling him a liar? Surely Truth has defamed poor David.”

    Why would he? Defamation is a statement that tends to lower a person in the estimation of right-thinking members of society, no right-thinking member of any society would read that trash, so no case.

    You willing to tell Sir Robert Jones your views of defamation and people who sue, then? :) :) :)

    What you mean is Bain would lose. ;)

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 15 You need to be logged in to vote
  430. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    Typical daddy fan, pure gutless wonders. Some might think they’d front up.

    Yes, another one that has an unhealthy (sick in fact) obsession with other peoples arses. Easy to see why truthiz and muggins get on so well.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  431. Rowan (1,778 comments) says:

    Going to be really entertaining when Kents defamation case gets to court, I guess all his mates from the ‘justice for Daddy’ witchhunt will try to distance themselves from it in order to save their own skin. What a bunch of gutless wonders!

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  432. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    Stooges these days ;)

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 15 You need to be logged in to vote
  433. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    Judith (1,228) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 9:17 pm
    goldnkiwi (175) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 9:06 pm

    That is the first time I have caught you out on an outright lie lol

    Thanks for that.

    —————————-

    Just because you think the comment was about you deary.

    It wasn’t.

    The person it was aimed at, rushed straight over and logged in. She then left again without posting.

    Like I said ’tis not all bout you’, you are in fact, a nobody in the bigger picture.

    A mere donkey, doing the work of others and in a good position to use for bait. It worked.
    …………………

    Not me I work for myself lol ;)

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 13 You need to be logged in to vote
  434. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    What a bunch of gutless wonders!

    Rowan, do you have evidence to back that up, or is it just your core belief?

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 11 Thumb down 14 You need to be logged in to vote
  435. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    @Nosty. This incessant demand for others to reveal themselves … who are you? Name? Or tell us a bit about yourself. Anything important we should know?

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 13 You need to be logged in to vote
  436. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    marzuka (6) Says:

    January 31st, 2013 at 1:50 am
    Hi Kanz,

    As Judith said, so many errors not worth even talking about. I will bite and answer one.
    You have made the point before that there would be little force coming from the gunshot. How then does he, on your ‘behind the curtain ambush’ have the old man’s body, starting close to the floor, suddenly move the head up then down again to get that far, and the left leg, the most bent one, suddenly shoot out to be straight?

    Simple. He’s trying to avoid getting shot ie trying to move away – how would you react to a gun in your face? Probably Your head would flinch away you hand defensively react and your Legs being levers would push upwards and out of relative crouch. All these creating momentum you away from curtains even after bullet is delivered. This is crucial and something defenss static equilibrium chair balancing contortion cannot achieve.

    Actually you’ll see in my sim that Robin acting defensively ends up quite like actual resting position, unlike the defenses drop like a stone suicide scenario with an utterly inconsistent centre of mass over a metre away from actuality.

    see sim exaple robin acting defensively:
    http://marzuka.x10.mx/trademe/javascript/bain%20sim%201.06/bain%20sim.htm

    ross69 (1,898) Says:
    January 29th, 2013 at 8:19 am
    The indentation looks quite severe when you enlarge the photo.

    A small pimple can look “quite severe” when enlarged too

    Unlike a pimple though, the mark is of right size, shape and position for glasses even though according to david glasses hadn’t been worn for days. Fortunately even judith implicitly concurs is a mark from wearing glasses.

    note how similar to nose pad the mark is:
    https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-i5OGnHXDbY0/UOKCZrf3E7I/AAAAAAAABiw/O47s61lKA0Y/s800/bain%2520glasses6.jpg
    Kanz
    This is all academic now anyway.
    Ian Binnie found, using the prosecution evidence and setting it out very clearly, that the bloody footprint was the old man’s. That can never again be explained away. If you like, it is the shell case in the Thomas case.

    Did david show binnie his foot. Do we know david’s toeless foot length? if david’s toeless foot length was around 240mm like the toeless prints were what would you think then?

    Seems to me this is quite likely:

    https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-26HtE3L6n_Q/UOaKqJ2Lv1I/AAAAAAAABjs/ZX1GBHAK58k/s1200/bain%252520footprint6b.jpg

    ciao

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 15 You need to be logged in to vote
  437. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Yes Dennis, you are a gutless wonder. Congratulations on your sisterhood, old bun.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 14 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  438. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Look,

    some more spamming, what a surprise.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  439. Rowan (1,778 comments) says:

    Muggins @ 8.30
    “By the same token I also accept that there was blood on David Bain’s fingers when he placed them on the rifle, as testified by Kim Jones, the police fingerprint expert.
    So the question is was that Stephen’s blood, or was that rabbits blood.
    Bain told Binnie it must have been rabbits blood, but I am almost certain it would have been Stephen’s blood, seeing as all the other blood on the rifle that tested positive for DNA was accepted as being Stephen’s blood”

    Again picking and choosing what you wish to believe Muggins, translation for you, you accept the view of a proven liar (Kim Jones) that it was human blood, despite no human DNA being found on the rifle at any stage despite extensive testing. Also for it to be blood under the fingerprints the ridges would have been black (which Jones agreed) but I suppose you believe that David has a unique fingerprint which produces a ‘white ridged bloody fingerprint’ and everyone else in the worlds bloody fingerprints would show a black ridges
    “You are almost certain” better translation ‘there is about a 0.0000% probability that’ as your ‘certainty’ is just wild speculation

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  440. Truthiz (185 comments) says:

    Going to be really entertaining when Kents defamation case gets to court

    Can’t wait for it, but by then the Joeka’s (as in JOKE) reputation will be absolute sh*te, so it probably won’t even get back to court, LOL

    .
    :)

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 12 Thumb down 14 You need to be logged in to vote
  441. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Give him an extra 0 Rowan, he must have thought he meant something.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  442. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Jacob Cohen (11) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 8:16 pm

    So David Bain wasn’t dealt with by a judicial process in the first trial, but still went to jail for nearly 13 years.
    I think this is a little more difficult for Collins to explain to the masses than any of the lapses she discovered in the Binnie report.

    ———————–

    That is technically correct. The Privy Council ruling of a ‘miscarriage of justice’, means the judicial process did not exist in the first trial, and therefore the conviction of someone, without judicial process, is not valid.

    Bain was of course, still answerable to the charges, which needed to be proved. They weren’t, so in law, as one is innocent until proven guilty, he has the status of an innocent person. Compensation is not related to any judicial process though, however, must meet the basic requirement that governs everything done by the state, that the process must be fair and equitable.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 16 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  443. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    How’s it going truthie?

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  444. gamefisher (416 comments) says:

    Rowan (512) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 9:28 pm

    Quote”Gamefisher @ 9.00
    Try using logic and common sense. The scenario and resulting probability you gave being as usual 0.0000% likely, are you really as stupid as your post suggests. Robin was the last to die under either scenario. The chance of it being anything other than a contact wound or anyone elses blood being the same.”unquote

    Using logic and common sense tells me with Stevens room being the closes to Robins caravan there was a risk that Robin heard the commotion in Stevens room so could of enter the house at any time to investigate it so most likely died before the paper run.
    Laniet had considerable amount of fluid in her lungs so was alive for a long enough period while Robin was being shot.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 10 Thumb down 15 You need to be logged in to vote
  445. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Truthiz (143) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 9:44 pm
    ____________________

    Mr Karam has secured the confidence of one this countries most esteemed experts in Constitutional Law.

    Clearly, people far more important than you, do not share your sentiments.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 14 Thumb down 14 You need to be logged in to vote
  446. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    In conclusion, the Bain case is now going to the High Court – when a little over a day ago, that was never going to happen, couldn’t happen.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 15 Thumb down 13 You need to be logged in to vote
  447. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    January 30th, 2013 at 5:43 pm
    Judith (1,159) Says:

    ———————

    Muggins, there were more than 2000 photos taken. Only a small percentage were shown in Court.
    Get over yourself. You haven’t phoned anyone, you don’t know what you are talking about (if you did you’d know how many photos were taken).

    Judith,stop lying.
    If there was a photo of Bain’s torso it would have been shown, otherwise why would the defence be asking about those scratches? They could have just asked for that photo you are lying about. The defence would have been over the moon if there had been a photo of David Bain’s torso not showing any scratches. Had there been a photo of David Bain’s torso taken that morning it would have shown those scratches,bet on it.

    But ,just so we are quite clear on this.
    I phoned four police officers in Dunedin.
    Two said they did not see Bain naked, but they both said they was out of the room for a few minutes.
    The third said I would have to go through his boss, which I did.
    I had to email a request for official information which I did.
    I received an email back saying that the third police officer had been in the doorway all the time that Pryde was examining Bain and that he was never naked. He was always in possession of a blanket. I understand it was the same blanket as he had over him when he was put in that ambulance.
    And I reckon he was able to hide those scratches on his torso by deft manipulation of that blanket.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 9 Thumb down 16 You need to be logged in to vote
  448. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    goldnkiwi (178) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 9:35 pm
    Not me I work for myself lol
    —————————

    That’s probably not all you have to do for yourself deary.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 13 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  449. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    muggins (1,851) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 9:52 pm

    had to email a request for official information which I did.
    I received an email back saying
    —————————–

    You see Muggins, that’s where you let yourself down…
    Pity you didn’t know more about the system so you could line your lies up a little better.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 15 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  450. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    @Nosty. That’s not very friendly, old bean. Here’s me thinking a leopard might change its spots. Unfortunately you hate society so much you’d rather suck up a lot of nonsense than face the truth about Bain. Rowan is a moron and Kan is a klutz, but you’re an intelligent man.

    You must see the natural place, and probably only place to hold a rifle fitted with sights and a large suppressor, in order to guide it to your temple, is at the muzzle, that is the suppressor. But that had two pristine prints of Stephen there, no smudging. How do you explain that to yourself?

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 10 Thumb down 16 You need to be logged in to vote
  451. Rowan (1,778 comments) says:

    GF
    You clearly forgot to tell Bates, Raftery et al as they disagree with you. You think you know better than them! If it was likely that it was 5 then PR don’t you think this is what they would have run. Yes Robin heard the commotion as he was there in the bedroom. If he was in the caravan and heard it would he really have just waited there, no sign of a struggle in lounge and on the crowns own admission Daddy was the likely person who turned on the computer, yet David somehow got behind the curtains with the gun while daddy was in the lounge then ambushed and shot him, your explanations are getting more and more laughable!

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  452. Truthiz (185 comments) says:

    Can’t wait bain in court will be more hilarious than joeka.

    :)

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 12 Thumb down 15 You need to be logged in to vote
  453. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    muggins (1,851) Says:

    January 31st, 2013 at 9:52 pm
    January 30th, 2013 at 5:43 pm
    Judith (1,159) Says:

    ———————

    Muggins, there were more than 2000 photos taken. Only a small percentage were shown in Court.
    Get over yourself. You haven’t phoned anyone, you don’t know what you are talking about (if you did you’d know how many photos were taken).

    Judith,stop lying.
    If there was a photo of Bain’s torso it would have been shown, otherwise why would the defence be asking about those scratches? They could have just asked for that photo you are lying about. The defence would have been over the moon if there had been a photo of David Bain’s torso not showing any scratches.

    Judith,you must try to stop telling porkies.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 15 You need to be logged in to vote
  454. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Truthiz (144) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 10:01 pm
    Can’t wait bain in court will be more hilarious than joeka.

    ———————————-

    Oh, the sheer ignorance. What a joke you are.

    Bain won’t even be present unless he wants to. The entire argument will be presented by legal representation.

    Are you really stupid enough to think Collins and Bain will battle this out in person!

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  455. Truthiz (185 comments) says:

    Its MY CORE BELIEF I wiped down the keyboard, so you couldn’t possibly know it was me who used it.

    Its MY CORE BELIEF that I got Laniet the first time so she couldn’t possibly have gurgled …

    Its MY CORE BELIEF that Joe will give me the money he owes me soon …

    Its MY CORE BELIEF that the people of NZ will love me, even though I executed my family ….

    etc …….

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 9 Thumb down 16 You need to be logged in to vote
  456. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    @Judith. ” … Collins and Bain will battle this out in person!”

    Will David have his gun?

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 11 Thumb down 15 You need to be logged in to vote
  457. Truthiz (185 comments) says:

    Don’t worry Jinny,

    I remember what you said earlier and when the time comes, payment will be served … :)

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 15 You need to be logged in to vote
  458. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    Truthiz. ” MY CORE BELIEF .. executed my family.”

    Is that the same core as in cordite?

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 10 Thumb down 15 You need to be logged in to vote
  459. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    muggins (1,852) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 10:08 pm
    ———————
    The photo doesn’t show any scratches, and wouldn’t even if they were there. It is of the tattoo, side on, however, it is possible to see that there is no shirt on the chest area.

    Dr Prydes diagram shows the tattoo, which is immediately adjacent to the area where the scratches were said to be by one of the witnesses. Pryde could not have seen the tattoo, without seeing that area of the body adjacent to it. In order to reveal the tattoo, and not any scratches on that side, he would have had to have lifted any blanket up over his head, and kept part of it over his chest, whilst revealing the top of his arm. An entirely difficult procedure and one that would have immediately made anyone suspicious. Especially as in doing that he would have revealed his genitals.

    Of course, there is the possibility that the scratches were on the left side (which will be your next argument as the other witness said they were on that side), except Dr Pryde noted the immunisation scars on the very top of David’s left arm. Again they could not be examined and measured, without lifting the bulk of any blanket upwards, thus revealing everything, and again being a very suspicious action.

    Fact is Muggins, you are talking crap and what is more, you’ve put yourself into a tricky position by doing so.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 15 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  460. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    Who is the odd one out?

    David Bain’s fiance (Liz Davies)
    Salman Rushdie
    Prince Harry
    Barack Obama

    Answer: Liz Davies of course. All the others get to take off their bullet-proof vests before going to bed.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 15 Thumb down 16 You need to be logged in to vote
  461. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Truthiz (146) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 10:16 pm
    Don’t worry Jinny,

    I remember what you said earlier and when the time comes, payment will be served …

    ———————————–

    Are you threatening me?

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  462. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    ross69 (1,940) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 10:26 pm

    ———————
    Leave Liz out of this, you disgusting piece of trash.

    How typical of JFRB and Counterspinners to resort to harassing family members. Usually they prefer children, but any age will do when they can’t get at young family members.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 16 Thumb down 15 You need to be logged in to vote
  463. Truthiz (185 comments) says:

    Are you threatening me ?

    Nay,

    You do remember what you accused me of ?

    then expect a serve from the same plane …

    you disgusting liar …. :)

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 9 Thumb down 16 You need to be logged in to vote
  464. Truthiz (185 comments) says:

    Is that the same core as in cordite ?

    Nah, more like COR I DID IT ……

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 11 Thumb down 16 You need to be logged in to vote
  465. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    Leave Liz out of this, you disgusting piece of trash.

    I think it’s past your bedtime.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 10 Thumb down 16 You need to be logged in to vote
  466. Belinda (126 comments) says:

    Ross69 I thought your joke was funny.
    I’m sure poor Liz will hear a lot worse about her betrothed before her life is over.
    Do you think she reads here?

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 9 Thumb down 17 You need to be logged in to vote
  467. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    David was chatting to Joe the other day. David says “You’ll never guess what happened after Laniet gurgled and I went into her bedroom to check on her”.

    “What happened?”, asks Joe, a little bemused.

    “Well”, says David, “She shouted at me, David, put down that bloody gun!”

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 11 Thumb down 16 You need to be logged in to vote
  468. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    Do you think she reads here?

    Belinda, I thought Liz might be Judith. :)

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 9 Thumb down 16 You need to be logged in to vote
  469. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    Lighten up folks. A wife, being the romantic sort, sent her David a text:

    “If you are sleeping, send me your dreams. If you are laughing, send me your smile. If you are eating, send me a bite. If you are drinking, send me a sip. If you are crying, send me your tears. I love you.”

    He replied: “I’m having a shit. What should I do?”

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 11 Thumb down 16 You need to be logged in to vote
  470. Truthiz (185 comments) says:

    I think it’s past your bedtime.

    And so it was and all the little trolls went to bed and awaited their new commands from the joka for the next day.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 9 Thumb down 17 You need to be logged in to vote
  471. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    Do they all roll over? And the little one said roll over, roll over.
    Especially ‘dreary’ Judith.

    Was there ever an answer to whom Annie is/ was?

    Just as an aside, after all of that hysteria….

    Is Counterspin an organised criminal organisation?
    Is JFRB an organised criminal organisation?
    Are the ‘guilty free forums’ illegal. Are they still called that?
    Is it illegal to belong to any of those groups?

    Is it against the law to consider that Robin Bain did not kill himself and therefore he did not kill anyone else?

    If the answer to all of those questions is no, why is it an issue, let alone any business of ‘Judiths’ who may wish to contribute to their communications?

    I think she thinks she is Brain lol I think she is Pinky ;)

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 11 Thumb down 18 You need to be logged in to vote
  472. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    Freedom of association is a pretty fundamental human right isn’t it?
    I mean I could even associate with murderers if I wanted to, right?
    Not that I want to, thank goodness.

    I have a niece who apparently considers a guy on death row in America as her boyfriend, she is in Australia and they have never met.
    A peculiar affliction, I am glad she is not related by blood.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 11 Thumb down 19 You need to be logged in to vote
  473. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    goldnkiwi (180) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 11:29 pm
    —————————-

    No, but it is illegal to stalk, harass, and defame people, and it is particularly so when children are included in that harassment.

    It is also illegal to misrepresent what they are told by others, and to contact and harass witnesses and jury members.

    These are all activities that have been conducted by members of the groups you mention. Some of which has resulted in Court action being taken against them, with at least 18 of them being named in various complaints.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 19 Thumb down 13 You need to be logged in to vote
  474. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    @Judith. Mornin’, m’Lady. “Illegal to stalk, harass. defame.” Shall we compare numbers for homicide?

    @goldnkiwi. How many murderers in the groups you mention?

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 12 Thumb down 18 You need to be logged in to vote
  475. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Well there’ll be no talk in the High Court about what Mrs Laney said, or what somebody told somebody over the phone, there’ll be no long list of ‘evidence’ given from sites being sued, no photo shopped graphics, or drawings by perverts obsessed with the bodies of young men, there’ll be no chance for gutless wonders to attend because they might get seen, but there will be argument about whether the application is arguable, probably with an effort to have it dismissed out of hand countered with assertions that the application is not only of high public interest but also one of constitutional importance of the most basic nature as enshrined in the BORA. The High Court might decline to make a ruling and instead send it on to the COA or Supreme Court. Because the case ‘began’ long before the PC was abandoned, it could possibly even go there but my feeling is that our Courts will grapple well the ‘problem’ of a citizen, or a potential group of citizen, being ex-communicated from the same rights as others and from the principles of TBORA.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 17 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  476. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    Looking forward to the judicial review. Hope there’s a panel of three judges, to give weight to the proceedings. Will Collins be crushed? Will Bain be bane? Will Binnie be binned? Will Karam be custard? Will Key be smiling? These are the questions. Remember, the Toffs in London won’t be poking their noses in and fucking Justice in New Zealand again. Miscarriage of justice my arse.

    “THE JUDGE WAS VERY KIND TO ME”
    “IT IS MY CORE BELIEF I WAS NOT THERE”

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 12 Thumb down 15 You need to be logged in to vote
  477. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    Judith (1,237) Says:

    January 31st, 2013 at 10:21 pm
    muggins (1,852) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 10:08 pm
    ———————
    The photo doesn’t show any scratches, and wouldn’t even if they were there. It is of the tattoo, side on, however, it is possible to see that there is no shirt on the chest area.

    Dr Prydes diagram shows the tattoo, which is immediately adjacent to the area where the scratches were said to be by one of the witnesses. Pryde could not have seen the tattoo, without seeing that area of the body adjacent to it. In order to reveal the tattoo, and not any scratches on that side, he would have had to have lifted any blanket up over his head, and kept part of it over his chest, whilst revealing the top of his arm. An entirely difficult procedure and one that would have immediately made anyone suspicious. Especially as in doing that he would have revealed his genitals.

    Of course, there is the possibility that the scratches were on the left side (which will be your next argument as the other witness said they were on that side), except Dr Pryde noted the immunisation scars on the very top of David’s left arm. Again they could not be examined and measured, without lifting the bulk of any blanket upwards, thus revealing everything, and again being a very suspicious action.

    Judith.
    I repeat. If there was a photo of David Bain’s torso showing that it was scratch free then the defence would have produced it.
    They had to rely on Dr Pryde’s diagram which showed a shaded area where that tattoo is.
    So the defence then said that if Dr Pryde saw that tattoo then he would have seen those scratches. That ain’t necessarily so. If Bain had that blanket draped around his neck and torso Dr Pryde may well have been able to have seen that tattoo.
    I find it interesting that you keep referring to a photo. Joe Karam does not mention any such photo in Trial by Ambush.
    If you have seen such a photo you had better tell him where he can find it. Make his day.
    One further point. Bain told Binnie he was naked at some point of that examination. He was never naked.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 15 You need to be logged in to vote
  478. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    Remember, the Toffs in London won’t be poking their noses in and fucking Justice in New Zealand again.

    Rowan was right then. He has wondered if the PC made their ruling just to piss off people here.
    They should have kept their noses out of it. Nobody wants justice here, they feel more comfortable with lynch mobs, silly uniforms and burning torches.
    Judges only spoil the fun of stalkers, haters, pedo lovers and the like, they should be left alone to spread their hate as they wish.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  479. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    Judith (1,237) Says:

    January 30th, 2013 at 11:29 am
    That Strip Search.

    It is entirely possible that David was allowed to keep a blanket for modesty. I don’t doubt that in the slightest.

    The fact that three policemen were present at various stages would make such a requirement, practical.

    The fact that only one of those three mentions the blanket.

    The fact that all three of them, of which were present at various times, didn’t see him naked, it not at all surprising.

    Doctor Pryde, and any Doctor for that fact, would not willing expose their ‘client’ to the stares from onlookers.

    Doctor Pryde’s examination including his having to examine the entire body for anything unusual was signed off by him. It also required him to do some standard medical tests, that involved the chest being exposed. He was also required to take intimate samples. Dr Pryde was a professional who would not have falsified his work, especially with so many witnesses.

    Judith,
    So you agree that David Bain was lying to Binnie when he told him he was completely naked?

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 15 You need to be logged in to vote
  480. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Desperation is in the air.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  481. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    Judith (1,237) Says:

    January 29th, 2013 at 12:50 pm
    muggins (1,779) Says:
    January 29th, 2013 at 12:43 pm

    As I have already said, Judith,Rodney Hide should butt out.

    ————————————–

    Or what, you and your poisoned mates are going to keep up the discrediting campaign, stalk him, harass him, make up stories about his finances, relationships, harass his sister, attempt to destroy any of his family’s business interests, frighten the children of his family members, try to destroy reputation and work interests, make obscene and threatening phone calls, etc etc ……… just like you have to other people who have tried to do to Karam and others who defend David?

    Nice lot of people you JFRBers, Robin would have disowned the lot of you.

    Good to see you are still issuing your threats though.
    I’ll ensure Rodney gets a copy so he can begin shaking in his shoes!!

    Judith, I was under the impression you were referring to Rodney Hide when you mentioned “his finances,his sister,etc.,etc.,”
    but then you told me it wasn’t him at all. So who were you referring to,if you don’t mind me asking?

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 15 You need to be logged in to vote
  482. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    I find it interesting that you keep referring to a photo. Joe Karam does not mention any such photo in Trial by Ambush.
    If you have seen such a photo you had better tell him where he can find it. Make his day.

    Karam could care less about photos now. It is you who keeps getting stuck in the past, because the future is not looking good.
    He is gunning for a Minister. One who thought she could treat him and the NZ public like fools. Kiwis, at least those with integrity, expect justice to be fair, equitable and open. It was under the previous Minister, but this one thinks she is Judge, Jury and Executioner. Perhaps she thinks she is Judge Judy.
    This is going to be costly for her in more ways than one.

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  483. flipper (3,524 comments) says:

    Good morning Nostalgia-NZ ( also J,K & R)…..

    I admire your patience with the full moon drumming mob… They are so silly.

    N-NZ .. thanks for your posts on the legal aspects. I am now looking at the JR from a solely political standpoint.

    All the BS about equality beiore the law is just that. Yesterday I mentioned “privacy” inrelation to the JR. I of course meant “primacy”.

    If this goes past the first judicial hurdle, the Cabinet will need to move, quickly, to put an end to it by settling, albeit on some esoiteric point of “principle”.

    This is now an argument that Collins cannot win with the public. The prospect this dragging on into 2014 must now being giving Wayne Eagleson and Stephen Joyce nightmares. GOOD :)

    KBO

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  484. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    Desperation is in the air.

    Palpable, isn’t it?
    They are wanting to keep going back and changing the evidence, when the murder case was left behind years ago.
    It is a political question now. One that could now drag out until another election comes around. Voters don’t like to think that covering for errant departments is more important to the pollies than seeing the BOR is upheld.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  485. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Yes Flipper and Kanz it is probably all political now, unfortunately.

    On the positive side of that, David will have the full rights of any applicant in the High Court, no Minister will be deciding what is best for him, how lucky he is or what other problems he might be bringing on himself. He will be entitled to know everything and to be able to respond. In short it will not be a Ministerial kangaroo Court with changing goal posts.

    Even though there will be some, myself included – because this has bothered me since 2009, wanting to have the whole compensation wrongful imprisonment questions entered into legislation, I accept that David Bain need only address his own situation and that he is not responsible for the wider ramifications of the misuse of political powers.

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  486. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    Yeah, listen to the Privy Council: “Why would he say things to incriminate himself?” Really, did they they think Bain can’t tell the truth at all, ever?

    This is the end of the road for Bain. His lucky run has just run out. And no, it won’t be going to the Lords Longdrop in London; of that you can be quite sure. The Turkeys won’t be humiliating the NZ courts ever again with their crass off-the-cuff decisions. No more dunces writing dodgy reports: “David is a nice young man and he told men he would struggle to hurt an animal.”

    Is Karam going to be dictating terms to Key and Collins? Hahahah, good joke, good joke. After the dust has settled, it’s going to be: “No compensation, Mr Bain.”

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 16 Thumb down 16 You need to be logged in to vote
  487. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    The Turkeys won’t be humiliating the NZ courts ever again with their crass off-the-cuff decisions.

    Well, I wouldn’t call them Turkeys, and they may yet hear appeals from Mark Lundy and Peter Ellis. But given their decision re David Cullen Bain, both Lundy and Ellis must fancy their chances of having their convictions quashed.

    But I agree that David won’t be getting an early birthday present from the Justice Minister.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 12 Thumb down 16 You need to be logged in to vote
  488. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    Even though there will be some, myself included – because this has bothered me since 2009, wanting to have the whole compensation wrongful imprisonment questions entered into legislation, I accept that David Bain need only address his own situation and that he is not responsible for the wider ramifications of the misuse of political powers.

    This will have wider ramifications than just this case. For the courts to find that this has been mishandled, it will also show that clearer legislation is required for the question of compensation. It will show that the ‘discretionary’ payment for such is too open to political and departmental interference, which in this case has been abused.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  489. Chuck Bird (4,659 comments) says:

    “both Lundy and Ellis must fancy their chances of having their convictions quashed.”

    Probably not Ellis as he is innocent!

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  490. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    Binnie is a dunce and his report was binned. Can’t say fairer than that. No judge in the country will disagree.

    The report was to the minister and the minister is entitled to get opinions on it. No judge will disagree.

    The minister was considering the next step, the PM suggesting a new report was likely. Fair enough. No judge will disagree.

    Karam takes on Collins. Big mistake. Big, big mistake. Big, big, joke. Hahaha.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 13 Thumb down 13 You need to be logged in to vote
  491. Rowan (1,778 comments) says:

    Look in the mirror Dennis
    You are the joke, this the best you can do? The arrogance of some of the trolls on this website is amazing!

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  492. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    @Rowan … ouch :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  493. Psycho Milt (2,246 comments) says:

    He is gunning for a Minister

    Karam is, or Bain? Rather inappropriate metaphor, under the circumstances…

    It doesn’t seem particularly likely that Collins will be quaking in her boots at the thought that judges might want to poke their noses into how Cabinet makes discretionary decisions, but if it makes you feel better why the fuck not.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 14 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  494. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    flipper (1,339) Says:
    February 1st, 2013 at 9:29 am
    Good morning Nostalgia-NZ ( also J,K & R)…..

    I admire your patience with the full moon drumming mob… They are so silly.

    N-NZ .. thanks for your posts on the legal aspects. I am now looking at the JR from a solely political standpoint.

    All the BS about equality beiore the law is just that. Yesterday I mentioned “privacy” inrelation to the JR. I of course meant “primacy”.

    If this goes past the first judicial hurdle, the Cabinet will need to move, quickly, to put an end to it by settling, albeit on some esoiteric point of “principle”.

    This is now an argument that Collins cannot win with the public. The prospect this dragging on into 2014 must now being giving Wayne Eagleson and Stephen Joyce nightmares. GOOD

    KBO

    Good morning Flipper.

    It is surprising what the full moon can do for human and animal kind alike.

    You raise some interesting points, as always, especially regarding the looming of 2014.

    I think what strikes me most about this whole debacle is the ‘unfairness’.

    Firstly, that in New Zealand, unlike some other countries, where an acquittal in such circumstances results in an immediate recognition of wrongful imprisonment, and the cheque is written, wrongfully imprisoned individuals must be exposed to such a process, in order to receive compensation, for what has already been defined by law.

    Secondly, not only do we not have relevant legislation, but we leave such a decision to Cabinet, therefore allowing politics to play a roll in ‘justice’.

    Thirdly, that despite much advice from the Law Commission and other parties, none of our governments since 1998, appear to have considered their suggestions regarding Report 31, and the setting up of a tribunal to handle such matters.

    And lastly, that we have a Minister of Government, who has consistently shown herself to be biased towards the police, in both her previous, and current rolls. Who has totally mismanaged her other portfolios, e.g. ACC, in which other members of the public have been harmed by breaches of confidentiality, and lack of proper process. In all cases of which Ms Collins has put her own interests first, and managed the situation to escape any personal culpability, allowing others to ‘take the fall’ despite her being the person in charge, and now, has demonstrated her obvious bias in the current situation, by not following a fair and equitable process.

    2014 does loom close, and with the current government’s frightening small majority, they would do well to survey New Zealand’s history.

    New Zealanders, in general, do not like corruption, they do not like bullying politicians who are seen to manipulate situations to their own advantage. They especially do not like police incompetency or any suggestion of corruption. If nothing else, we are a ‘fair’ nation, and most, whilst not knowing the facts of this case or who was responsible, would rather David Bain receive compensation for the 13 years he spent in prison, than to allow yet another case of police misconduct and ineptitude be ignored or discounted by some Cabinet minister with over inflated career aspirations and a proven record of self-serving bias.

    I look forward to receiving more from OTB

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 14 Thumb down 14 You need to be logged in to vote
  495. twistedlemon (110 comments) says:

    Judith

    Can you name the countries where an acquittal in such circumstances results in an immediate recognition of wrongful imprisonment, and the cheque is written?

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 13 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  496. twistedlemon (110 comments) says:

    When Binnie was interviewing David, the defence team (in the person of Reed) was allowed to examine Bain and cross-examine the police witnesses.

    The prosecution was not allowed this same right. Why not?

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 15 Thumb down 13 You need to be logged in to vote
  497. gamefisher (416 comments) says:

    The Government could of handled the Binnie report differently and it would still be debatable if it was handled fairly. I can’t see what practical difference it would of made because the outcome still had to be the same because Binnie report simply did not meet the standard required and the Goverment have every right to get it reviewed.
    Gees D Bain got a second trial because of mistakes made at the first trial now he wants compensation based on a flawed report full of mistake, talk about wanting the cake and eat it too.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  498. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    @Judith. Talk about fairness, manipulation, corruption and bullying? You’re ‘aving a larf…

    If the half-witted NZ public listened for five minutes to half the overwhelming evidence they would know the truth. Instead they’ve had half a lifetime listening to “He’s such a nice young man” and the poisonous “Dirty old man was having sex with his daughter.”

    I don’t think this nonsense will happen again for a long time. The Crown will appeal crap decisions from dopey, confused, biased, lazy and gutless juries.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 14 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  499. Norma (6 comments) says:

    If David Bains first lawyer, says David lied and is certain of Davids guilt, then why would we pay him for killing his family ?

    Isn’t there a law about profitting of your crime ?

    Is Joe Karam for real about his Mugabe comments about Collins ?

    Sounds more like a spoiled brat.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 16 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  500. lazarus (68 comments) says:

    The only desperation I can see is in the Karam/Bain camp.
    The Application by Karam/Bain is their final gambit and doomed to failure.
    So long suckers.
    Oh by suckers I mean
    judith, nos, kanz, rowan, flipper (other assorted loons) et al
    There is going to be NO COMPO ever get it.
    Sorry in case you didn’t understand
    NO COMPO IS GOING TO BE PAID EVER EVER EVER

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 14 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  501. flipper (3,524 comments) says:

    Hi Judith.
    Good input that will be quoted elsewhere. Thanks.

    The comment by something, self-named as lazarus, is revealing…. as is the non de plume.

    I look forward to the day when all this settled in favour of Mr Bain, and all the idiot mob gather on a river bank, or somewhere appropriate, and follow the “Jones Guyanan cult” path to oblivion. They will, of course, need to find the goat to deliver the cyanide. :)

    Once that journey is complete they will be able to ask Robin why he did it! :) :) :)

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 15 Thumb down 16 You need to be logged in to vote
  502. Nookin (3,031 comments) says:

    Flipper
    I know that those who disagree with you are capable of caustic comment and are equally provocative but have you ever considered that a person who considers that those who disagree with him should be euthanised –simply by reason of the fact that they view matters differently — might be in need of urgent medical care and should not be allowed anywhere near the justice system?

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  503. Truthiz (185 comments) says:

    Well, you all still here …

    Another brilliant day in Paradise, but you are still toiling away in your boxes …

    Have fun folks, on the merry-go-round of possibilities, I’m off to the beach ….. :)

    Remember, David wrote the computer message and then everything else falls in to place …

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 13 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  504. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    lazarus (68) Says:

    February 1st, 2013 at 12:19 pm
    The only desperation I can see is in the Karam/Bain camp.
    The Application by Karam/Bain is their final gambit and doomed to failure.
    So long suckers.
    Oh by suckers I mean
    judith, nos, kanz, rowan, flipper (other assorted loons) et al
    There is going to be NO COMPO ever get it.
    Sorry in case you didn’t understand
    NO COMPO IS GOING TO BE PAID EVER EVER EVER

    Amen to that.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  505. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    @Nookin. Be kind to flipper, just quietly pick up his toys. Please. It’s going to be very hard for him to realise he’s wrong; just a washed-up old blowhard who Key ignores. Key isn’t going to sack Collins and Collins isn’t going to pay killers. No court is going to make her; not now, not later, not ever. The chances of getting another report from another dunce are quite low.

    “STEPHEN COULD HAVE BEEN SUCH A STRONG MAN.” Yes, we know. Quite a struggle, wasn’t it? Blood everywhere.

    “THE JUDGE WAS VERY KIND TO ME.” A man protesting his innocence?
    “MY CORE BELIEF IS I WAS NOT THERE.” Is that a “NO” or a “DON’T KNOW”?

    “DAVID DOESN’T KNOW THE EVIDENCE.” Does he know Grimm Brothers’ fairy tales?

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 14 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  506. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    twistedlemon (71) Says:

    February 1st, 2013 at 11:47 am
    When Binnie was interviewing David, the defence team (in the person of Reed) was allowed to examine Bain and cross-examine the police witnesses.

    The prosecution was not allowed this same right. Why not?

    They will be next time round.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  507. twistedlemon (110 comments) says:

    Joe Karam is very keen on the process being fair and equitable. I agree with him, as I am sure Judith does..

    So there must be a very good reason why the defence were given different (and superior) rights of examination to the prosecution. Otherwise Joe Karam would be requesting equal rights for both sides, wouldn’t he?

    Judith will know the answer.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  508. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    This is who was at Doyles’ interview

    Date of Interview: 1 9 July 2012
    Place : John Wickliffe House, Dunedin
    Attendees Annabel Markham (Crown Law Office)

    This is who was at Weir’s interview

    Date of Interview: 19 July 2012
    Place: John Wickliffe House, Dunedin
    Attendees Annabel Markham (Crown Law Office)

    This is who was at Bain’s interview

    Date of Interview: 23 July 2012
    Place: Copthorne Hotel , Auckland
    Attendees: John Pike and Annabel Markham (Crown Law Office)
    Michael Reed CQ
    Matthew Karam
    Joe Karam
    Stuart McGilvray (Ministry of Justice)

    Look fair to you?

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  509. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    Dennis Horne (582) Says:
    February 1st, 2013 at 8:07 am
    @Judith. Mornin’, m’Lady. “Illegal to stalk, harass. defame.” Shall we compare numbers for homicide?

    @goldnkiwi. How many murderers in the groups you mention?
    Vote: 8 11
    ………….
    Trick question lol I would guess none?
    In saying that however, there does seem to be ‘infiltration’, look at all that hysteria last night
    With nom de plumes etc who would know.
    Why would someone so vociferously on David’s side such as ‘Judith’, be privy to who was logging into the ‘free forums’.
    I can’t imagine that they would be welcome, let alone seeing what was posted or not. If ‘Judith’ belongs, anyone could, I guess.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  510. twistedlemon (110 comments) says:

    So who decided who could be present at the witness examinations?

    Who decided who could have the right to examine witnesses directly?

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  511. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    muggins (1,857) Says:
    February 1st, 2013 at 4:03 pm
    twistedlemon (71) Says:

    February 1st, 2013 at 11:47 am
    When Binnie was interviewing David, the defence team (in the person of Reed) was allowed to examine Bain and cross-examine the police witnesses.

    How could Reed cross-examine the police witnesses, when he wasn’t present at their interview?

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  512. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    How could Reed cross-examine the police witnesses, when he wasn’t at there interview?

    When have either muggins or twistedlemon ever been seen to tell the truth? It just pisses them off that the truth is so easily searched. I see old Dennis, on other comments pages, still saying the old man invited Cunningham to board with him. Does this mean he is incapable of understanding the evidence, or that he spreads lies as wide as possible?

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  513. twistedlemon (110 comments) says:

    So why wasn’t Reed present? Was he not invited? Did he decline an invitation to be present?

    Did Binnie decide who could be present?

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  514. Rowan (1,778 comments) says:

    Lets look at the favourite argument of some of the Bsers
    “Nothing ties Robin to the rifle. NOTHING”

    And what exactly ties David to the rifle? It was his and had a old set of fingerprints shown not to be ‘bloody’ despite the nutters keep clinging to Kim Jones discredited evidence shown to be totally wrong.
    Similarly what links David to Margaret Bains broken glasses, Robins green jersey or the bloody gloves?
    The idiots will keep ranting about the lens in Stephens room which ‘must have been dislodged during a bloody struggle’ yet no forensic evidence suggests it was involved and it was ‘dusty’ and found in a place where it was unlikely to have got as a result of being dislodged in a violent struggle.
    Also we will be told that it was Davids gloves yes correct but ownership is irrelevant based on the glasses and the jersey, Robin also kept clothes in Davids room and they were probably the first pair of gloves he laid eyes on. Also based on the ‘red blood like’ staining and smears on Robins hands and palms, also traces of blood under his fingernails are totally consistent with Robin being the wearer of the bloody gloves. I don’t recall any blood traces on Davids hands or fingernails.
    Lastly the green jersey, Robins or Arawas depending on who you believe, both were 5’9, David being over 2 metres tall would never have fitted it (as shown in 1995), if he had worn it then there should have been considerably more blood around the V neck and wrist areas. Yet the trolls expect us to believe the jersey ‘shrunk’ in the wash.

    In summary the ownership of the rifle and the misinformation about the lens gets us nowhere and is easily spun out to fit the different scenarios, yet none of the idiots can get close to explaining the blood staining on Daddy, yet the bloody gloves and jersey point clearly away from David

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  515. Rowan (1,778 comments) says:

    Judith
    These trolls haven’t even read the interviews, yet they offer wild speculation and bs as you have just pulled up the ‘twisted sister’ on

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  516. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    twistedlemon (73) Says:
    February 1st, 2013 at 5:02 pm
    ———————-
    If you see on page 101 of David Bain’s interview, Binnie had asked a number of questions on behalf of the Crown Law Office. He then asks Mr Reed if he wishes to ‘re-examine’.

    The same process would applied for Weir and Doyle. Their representative was the Crown Law Office. If you read their interviews you will see Ms Markham’s input is recorded. The only difference being, that Bain’s representative, was not allowed any input or to attend those interviews.

    The Bain team was not present at Weir and Doyle’s interviews, however, the Crown Law Office was allowed to attend Bain’s interview.

    The Crown Law Office was not representing the Government, their representative was from MOJ.

    The only bias in that process was not in David Bain’s favour. But good of you to point out there was some definite inequality of treatment.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  517. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Kanz (849) Says:
    February 1st, 2013 at 5:12 pm

    ———————————–

    I agree, they now attempt to draw the attention away from their definitive statement:-

    twistedlemon (71) Says:

    February 1st, 2013 at 11:47 am
    When Binnie was interviewing David, the defence team (in the person of Reed) was allowed to examine Bain and cross-examine the police witnesses.

    Which was of course, incorrect. Although to be fair, I have seen the same thing posted before on here by a spinner, so they may have just been taken in by another spinner’s lies.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  518. twistedlemon (110 comments) says:

    Did Bain’s defense team want to attend the interview with the detectives?
    Did they ask to be present? Were they turned down?
    Why didn’t Karam and Reed insist on a presence?
    Who decided who could attend?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  519. corrigenda (142 comments) says:

    Quote: Mr Karam has secured the confidence of one this countries most esteemed experts in Constitutional Law.
    Clearly, people far more important than you, do not share your sentiments.

    Ahem, it was my understanding that once legal aid was denied, Karam was funding the appeal. In which case the solicitors are being paid by the hour, and their personal confidence/opinion counts for absolutely ZILCH, only billable hours (in 6 minute increments) are what counts. And anyway, who says he is important??

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  520. corrigenda (142 comments) says:

    Nostalgia-NZ (2,745) Says:
    February 1st, 2013 at 9:43 am
    … I accept that David Bain need only address his own situation …

    We would all dearly love to see David Bain address his own situation, unfortunately he is not allowed to open his mouth in case he puts his rather large foot in it.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  521. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    We would all dearly love to see David Bain address his own situation, unfortunately he is not allowed to open his mouth in case he puts his rather large foot in it.

    Yes, the one that is far too large to have left the bloody prints in Margaret’s room. We have noticed, as did Binnie.

    LMFAO

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  522. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    corrigenda (74) Says:
    February 1st, 2013 at 5:40 pm
    ———————–

    Legal aid was not applied for in the matter of the Judicial Review. Do you always have to misrepresent such things?

    It must be quite difficult for you to not be ‘in the loop’ and actually know what, if any financial arrangements are made pertaining to the Judicial Review.

    If it’s of any help, Prof. Joseph does not often take cases. It is extremely rare, and as a man of substantial means, he has no need to do so. I think you can safely say, for Prof. Joseph, this is not about ‘the money’.

    I do hope you are not now going to start an analysis of Prof. Joseph’s financial circumstances as you did for Joe Karam. We all know how that sort of carry on goes, don’t we?

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  523. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    corrigenda (75) Says:
    February 1st, 2013 at 5:43 pm

    We would all dearly love to see David Bain address his own situation, unfortunately he is not allowed to open his mouth in case he puts his rather large foot in it.
    ————————

    However, in the last six months, David Bain has given a television interview, two magazine interviews and spoken at a conference in Perth.

    In the next breath you will be saying he is an attention seeker. Let’s face it, you will pick fault with anything he does. We get the message.

    David is shy, has been his whole life. It is not unusual or unexpected for him to have a representative speak for him in some cases. AAT did, despite what one of your clown friends likes to say. AAT frequently turned down interviews, and tried to avoid the public attention by appointing a member of his support team to speak on his behalf. But you wouldn’t dare come on here and run that behaviour down.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  524. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    twistedlemon (75) Says:
    February 1st, 2013 at 5:38 pm

    Did Bain’s defense team want to attend the interview with the detectives?
    Did they ask to be present? Were they turned down?
    Why didn’t Karam and Reed insist on a presence?
    Who decided who could attend?

    Why do you ask these questions after stating

    twistedlemon (75) Says:
    February 1st, 2013 at 11:47 am

    When Binnie was interviewing David, the defence team (in the person of Reed) was allowed to examine Bain and cross-examine the police witnesses.

    The prosecution was not allowed this same right. Why not?

    Are you a cop? They say what has happened, then look for the evidence to fit.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  525. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Kanz (850) Says:
    February 1st, 2013 at 5:47 pm
    We would all dearly love to see David Bain address his own situation, unfortunately he is not allowed to open his mouth in case he puts his rather large foot in it.

    Yes, the one that is far too large to have left the bloody prints in Margaret’s room. We have noticed, as did Binnie.

    LMFAO

    ————————–

    LOL – I enjoyed that! ;-) :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  526. corrigenda (142 comments) says:

    Judith (1,243) Says:

    Legal aid was not applied for in the matter of the Judicial Review.

    You obviously read a different news report to the one I did, but these things happen.

    I think you can safely say, for Prof. Joseph, this is not about ‘the money’.

    You may say what you please, but did Prof Joseph actually say “It is not about the money” and did he actually say it was pro bono?? Or are you putting words in his mouth?

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  527. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    corrigenda (76) Says:
    February 1st, 2013 at 5:59 pm
    ————————–

    Nice try, but it’s actually none of your business. Make of it whatever you like

    You have already lied about it saying legal aid was denied, when it was never applied for, so I’m sure you are more than capable of making up all sorts of lies to cover any situation you want to defame the one man in NZ that I really hope you do upset.

    I think Prof. Joseph could teach you a very important lesson about telling the truth.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  528. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    I think the jury of public opinion could be undecided about that, how large are they?
    The same person that measured Robin’s feet should measure David’s. Soon ;)

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  529. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    The same person that measured Robin’s feet should measure David’s. Soon

    Why is that? Does he have a loan of Ngamoki’s ruler?

    LMAO

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  530. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Judith (1,246) Says:
    February 1st, 2013 at 5:06 pm
    muggins (1,857) Says:
    February 1st, 2013 at 4:03 pm
    twistedlemon (71) Says:

    February 1st, 2013 at 11:47 am
    When Binnie was interviewing David, the defence team (in the person of Reed) was allowed to examine Bain and cross-examine the police witnesses.

    How could Reed cross-examine the police witnesses, when he wasn’t present at their interview?’

    He was actually hiding behind a blanket, for modesty reasons of course.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  531. flipper (3,524 comments) says:

    Sorry Nookie child et al…

    i would never advocate the spending of public monies to “put down” your mob. That would be a waste.

    If you read what I said (but given your comments, I doubt that you have reached a level of comprehension comparable to that of my eight (8) year old grandson), I was suggesting (not advocating), that given your crass stupidity you would very likely (just like Jones’ cult) commit mass, riutual suicide.

    If you do, you will be able to ask Robin why he killed the others, will you not? :)

    Give it up you silly fool.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  532. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    Then it would be like with like, mind you Robin’s would have been taken when he was ‘lying down’.
    Where does one measure a foot from?
    The same person would presumably measure in the same fashion.
    So David can lie down with his heels firmly on a slab and his feet measured to the tip of toe.
    So difficult as it is not as if they are squared off.

    The only person I recall reading as having measured David’s feet is Joe.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  533. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    Judith (1,246) Says:
    February 1st, 2013 at 5:24 pm

    twistedlemon (73) Says:
    February 1st, 2013 at 5:02 pm
    ———————-
    If you see on page 101 of David Bain’s interview, Binnie had asked a number of questions on behalf of the Crown Law Office. He then asks Mr Reed if he wishes to ‘re-examine’.

    So, were the the defence allowed the same input in the other interviews, or was even this process weighted towards the Crown?

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  534. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    Has Joseph stated that he believes David Bain factually innocent? Privately? Publicly?

    Has he stated he believes Bain should receive compensation? Privately? Publicly?

    Or is this merely a constitutional matter? Whether the courts can interfere with the day-to-day business of a democratically elected government?

    ———————-

    @Katz. You really are a fool. If you have a child Laniet’s age invite someone to stay in your home it is with your permission and in this case the lodger is your guest. If you don’t want the person you say “No, sorry” and in this case Robin could have made any number of excuses, including, for example, “This is the schoolhouse and it for our family only”. The rubbish you people talk. Incest or no incest he clearly didn’t shoot himself.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  535. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    The only person I recall reading as having measured David’s feet is Joe.

    Which proves only one thing.
    You need to do more reading.

    HINT: You won’t find the truth on any of the sites you get your information and instructions from.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  536. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    If you have a child Laniet’s age invite someone to stay in your home it is with your permission and in this case the lodger is your guest. If you don’t want the person you say “No, sorry” and in this case Robin could have made any number of excuses, including, for example, “This is the schoolhouse and it for our family only”. The rubbish you people talk.

    Know from experience, do you?
    Laniet was not a child, she was 18. I have read, but can’t put my finger on it right now, that she not only invited him to board there, but stayed up talking to him into the early hours of the morning, to keep herself safe from the old man. The reason you say the old man would say no is the very reason Laniet wanted him there.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  537. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    flipper (1,342) Says:
    February 1st, 2013 at 6:42 pm
    Sorry Nookie child et al…

    i would never advocate the spending of public monies to “put down” your mob. That would be a waste.

    If you read what I said (but given your comments, I doubt that you have reached a level of comprehension comparable to that of my eight (8) year old grandson), I was suggesting (not advocating), that given your crass stupidity you would very likely (just like Jones’ cult) commit mass, riutual suicide.

    If you do, you will be able to ask Robin why he killed the others, will you not?

    Give it up you silly fool.’

    I did notice note that distinction flipper. Nookin generally keeps things pretty well aligned, but he was off the point with that one this morning.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  538. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    Cue key word search……………

    I was thinking that there should be a competition…..

    No prizes per se, except for immortality ;)

    There seems to be a lot of infantile ‘collective name’ calling by David’s team.

    Would Robin’s team like to make some suggestions for a ‘collective name’ for ‘them?

    Re foot measurement
    I wish to be on record as saying that I would not accept Kanz’s (sounds like cancers) word for how big his ‘fish’ is. ;)
    Let alone the size of David’s feet.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  539. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Kanz (853) Says:
    February 1st, 2013 at 6:44 pm

    So, were the the defence allowed the same input in the other interviews, or was even this process weighted towards the Crown?

    ——————–

    In Weir and Doyle’s interview, David’s representatives were not allowed to be present in the interview. They did give questions to be asked, just as the Crown did for David, which is normal procedure, but the only other person present in the interview, was Ms Markham. Ms Markham was asked if she wanted to cross-examine, but declined.

    The Bain team did actually send a representative with the intention of attending, but they were not allowed to be present in the room during the interview.

    I don’t consider that to be fair, or balanced, especially when you see the line up David had to face.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  540. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    ‘Where does one measure a foot from?’

    From under the armpit?

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  541. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    Re foot measurement
    I wish to be on record as saying that I would not accept Kanz’s (sounds like cancers) word for how big his ‘fish’ is. ;)
    Let alone the size of David’s feet

    But you would be happy if Robert Ngamoki measured them? He works for the Police, and we know he can take measurements.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  542. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Maybe if it was a slighty withered ‘wild child’ from the sixties, complete with unkempt nails curving back under the foot and in need of a good clip, from across the road whilst wearing a wooden clothes peg on the nose. Far out man.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  543. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Dennis Horne (583) Says:
    February 1st, 2013 at 6:44 pm

    @Katz. You really are a fool. If you have a child Laniet’s age invite someone to stay in your home it is with your permission and in this case the lodger is your guest. If you don’t want the person you say “No, sorry” and in this case Robin could have made any number of excuses, including, for example, “This is the schoolhouse and it for our family only”. The rubbish you people talk. Incest or no incest he clearly didn’t shoot himself.
    ———————————-

    This was a man that was not allowed to live in the house with his family,
    who handed over his wages to his estranged wife, who was left with a pitiful sum for himself,
    whose wife and children were planning a new house he didn’t want,
    a man who was making no headway in his career, despite applying for lots of positions,
    whose ability to do the tasks assigned to his professional position was lacking,
    who couldn’t even manage his own personal hygiene needs,
    who appears to have had little control over anything very much in his life,

    and you want to claim that he would have had the ‘balls’ to say ‘No sorry’ to his daughter at that point in his life?

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  544. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    Obtuse, if one foot is measured lying down, (somehow I doubt that Robin was standing up) then a comparative foot measurement should be taken similarly, not with weight on it, when that measurement is then relied upon as too large, to have made the ‘prints’.

    With or without socks.;)

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  545. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Well, that’s a new one Robin wasn’t standing up when he was walking around.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  546. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    Maybe if it was a slighty withered ‘wild child’ from the sixties, complete with unkempt nails curving back under the foot and in need of a good clip, from across the road whilst wearing a wooden clothes peg on the nose. Far out man.

    Seen goldnkiwi’s feet then, huh?

    LMAO

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  547. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Fortunately not.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  548. twistedlemon (110 comments) says:

    @judith If “The Bain team did actually send a representative with the intention of attending, but they were not allowed to be present in the room during the interview.” exactly WHO said they were not allowed to be present?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  549. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    @Kanz. “Know from experience, do you?
    Laniet was not a child, she was 18. I have read, but can’t put my finger on it right now, that she not only invited him to board there, but stayed up talking to him into the early hours of the morning, to keep herself safe from the old man. The reason you say the old man would say no is the very reason Laniet wanted him there.”

    You really are something else. Laniet was his child, yes/no? If Laniet invited a lodger to stay in the house provided by the school then Robin’s approval can be assumed. The school provided the house for Robin and it was therefore his house, and Laniet certainly had no authority to invite anyone.

    And she stayed up all night talking did she, to avoid her father? Then why did she move in with him? Why didn’t she go back to the family home where her mother was?

    She wasn’t frightened of her freaky brother was she? She certainly had good reason to be. He locked them out of the lounge/computer alcove and threatened them with the rifle.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  550. corrigenda (142 comments) says:

    Judith (1,248) Says:
    You have already lied about it saying legal aid was denied, when it was never applied for, so I’m sure you are more than capable of making up all sorts of lies to cover any situation you want to defame the one man in NZ that I really hope you do upset.

    Why don’t you read what is actually posted? I never said legal aid was denied. I said “it was my understanding” which means I wasn’t sure of the situation which is totaly different. The rest was put in the nature of questions, not statements. Incidently, you didn’t answer my questions so I can presume you don’t know the answers.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  551. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    And she stayed up all night talking did she, to avoid her father? Then why did she move in with him? Why didn’t she go back to the family home where her mother was?’

    She did Dennis, and that’s when daddy flipped out.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  552. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    And she stayed up all night talking did she, to avoid her father? Then why did she move in with him? Why didn’t she go back to the family home where her mother was?

    She didn’t move in with him until she knew an older male friend of hers would be there too. Do you not understand anything?
    She was home that fateful weekend to talk to her Mother about moving home, AND TELLING HER WHAT THE OLD MAN WAS ALL ABOUT.
    This will not be found on your pedo loving sites, but can be found in the retrial transcripts. That is why you say you are not interested in reading Kyle Cunningham’s evidence.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  553. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    The incest is irrelevant. Whatever Robin was David Bain is a freak. “My core belief is I was not there.” No/Know/Don’t Know?

    The footprints prove nothing. A partial set of incomplete prints that even the man who measured them and said they were David’s doesn’t really know what he was looking at. The only importance they have is that Binnie decided they were Robin’s. Probably came to him in the night. Binnie, you are a dunce. Your report is going to be shredded. Goodbye.

    Any sign Joseph thinks David Bain is innocent? No.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  554. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    corrigenda (77) Says:
    February 1st, 2013 at 7:35 pm
    —————————–

    The JFRB Theme Song, sung by Corrigenda, and accompanied of course by their esteemed leader, so it’s all sung out of tune.

    Come on everybody clap your hands
    Now you’re looking good
    I’m gonna sing my song and you won’t take long
    We gotta do the twist and it goes like this

    Come on let’s twist again like we did last summer
    Yea, let’s twist again like we did last year
    Do you remember when things were really hummin’
    Yea, let’s twist again, twistin’ time is here

    Yeah round ‘n around ‘n up ‘n down we go again ……..

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  555. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    I never said legal aid was denied. I said “it was my understanding” which means I wasn’t sure of the situation which is totaly different.

    Does saying “it is my understanding” set the scene for then telling lies? Or is it that the people you get “your understanding” from lying to you and you just pass it on? Either way, spreading lies, gossip and rumour is all the pedo lovers have left.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  556. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Any sign Joseph thinks David Bain is innocent? No.’

    Every sign he thinks David has been denied natural justice, fair treatment and his rights under TBORA. But don’t worry about that tailspin Dennis.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  557. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Judith, how about some:

    ‘twisting by the pool…’

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  558. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    The footprints prove nothing. A partial set of incomplete prints that even the man who measured them and said they were David’s doesn’t really know what he was looking at.

    Finally, Old Dennis is getting the tiniest glimmer. He can see that the prosecution experts were guessing, even they didn’t know what they were doing or seeing or saying.
    Binnie called it what? The egregious errors of the Dunedin Police.
    Most would just call it the usual NZ system fuck up.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  559. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    I don’t care about the incest. It doesn’t explain the forensics.

    What I want to know is how a man shoots himself without smudging pristine prints on the muzzle of the rifle, by far the most natural place to hold it when guiding it to the left temple. Why his prints are not on the rifle, somewhere. Why David’s prints are but don’t count. Yeah, yeah, they’re old. Like an old wives’ tale.

    I want to know how the blood spot got onto the left index fingernail when that hand was supposedly at the trigger.

    I want to know how many men in a million would get up and fight and strangle and shoot and change and wash and still hold 400ml urine.

    I want to know why anyone would think Robin wouldn’t just kill himself if he were feeling guilty about incest.

    I want to know why he spared only David, the arsehole who locked him out of the lounge/computer alcove.

    I want to know why anyone in his right mind would believe Robin typed the immature self-serving message on the computer when he had all night to write a letter explaining himself.

    And if one senior judge in the whole country believes this crap I’d be very surprised.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  560. Truthiz (185 comments) says:

    David wrote the note on the computer, its really that simple …


    But you all enjoy, the merry-go-round …. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  561. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Do you ever feel like you’re going blah, blah blah Dennis? Stupid questions only stupid questions make, but keep chasing your tail.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  562. knockoutking (21 comments) says:

    ‘Where does one measure a foot from?’

    From under the armpit?
    ……………………………………

    try from the ass

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  563. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    It’s not the fault of the Dunedin police the sock prints were partial and incomplete. The socks obviously didn’t have much blood on them.

    David’s socks had blood on them. Of course, forgot, that means he innocent.

    Robin’s socks had no blood on them. Of course, forgot, he’s guilty.

    So another lawyer wants us to pay Bain compensation whether he’s innocent or not? Is that what you crackpots are saying?

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  564. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    Dennis Horne (586) Says:
    February 1st, 2013 at 7:58 pm

    Maybe you could ask Hentschel those questions. You say he didn’t know his own job but guessed anyway, so he could do some guessing for you on these too.
    The incest doesn’t explain the forensics, but it does explain the reason that the forensics in the lounge point to it being the scene of the old man’s suicide.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  565. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    It’s not the fault of the Dunedin police the sock prints were partial and incomplete.

    It’s not Bain’s fault that the Dunedin police described what they saw as complete, encompassing heel and toes, prints.

    LMAO, you truly are a comedian Dennis.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  566. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    Do you ever feel like you’re going blah, blah blah Dennis? Stupid questions only stupid questions make, but keep chasing your tail.

    He does seem to be getting quite hysterical. He needs to stop confusing himself, do you think it is from all of that spinning?

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  567. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    It doesn’t matter what the police saw, said they saw or anything else. There is no way of knowing if the prints were complete when they were so faint and indistinct.

    The incest certainly doesn’t explain the magazine on its edge a few millimetres away from Robin’s outstretched hand. He certainly didn’t drop it there or put it there. Miles away from the beanbag and under the low table.

    Again, no senior judge in the country believes this crap. You ain’t going to get any sympathy from the High Court on your hare-brained scheme to interfere with the day-to-day business of government.

    Anyway, I’m off for caviar and Champagne now. You stay and play quietly amongst yourselves. Lalalala……..

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  568. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    It would give anybody a headache, particularly where there are big gaps, very big gaps, in the brain matter.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  569. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    Judith (1,249) Says:
    February 1st, 2013 at 7:41 pm

    You are wrong, this is part of the chorus of their theme song, courtesy of Simple Image

    And now we’re Spinning, spinning, spinning
    Spinning, spinning through this magic land
    getting back to the beginning of the end
    that we once had

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  570. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Bye bye Dennis, don’t forget to do a little name dropping in the pool – while you’re twisting by it.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  571. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    The incest certainly doesn’t explain the magazine on its edge a few millimetres away from Robin’s outstretched hand.

    No, that was explained by the police themselves when they said they had to stand it up for the photograph.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  572. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    Man, that Dennis is sure some guy. He has spoken to EVERY senior Judge in the country and knows what they think. All I can say is, WOW what a guy.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  573. Truthiz (185 comments) says:

    Go Dennis …..

    But it was Wolf Blass and steak for this laddie …

    have a good one and remember u all

    David wrote the note on the computer … easy as that

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  574. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Gutless wonders these days.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  575. Chuck Bird (4,659 comments) says:

    I just finished reading “Missing Pieces” by Ian Wishart about how David Tamihere was not given a fair trial. When a new report is done hopefully by a panel that includes someone with a science degree it will be the end of the road for David Bain.

    You guys could do something useful and put your efforts into helping someone who is quite likely not guilty.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  576. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    January 27th, 2013 at 9:28 pm
    Dear Mr Binnie,

    In a press release of 12 December 2012, you said:

    “It is a curious feature of this case that all of the ‘external’ judges who have looked at the record of the case have rejected the arguments of the Solicitor General and the Crown Law Office regarding David Bain’s guilt. By far the most prominent, of course, were the five judges of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council…”

    The Privy Council did not assess or deliver a verdict on David’s guilt. Indeed, the Privy Council said that deciding the issue of guilt was not its role. It opined:

    “the issue of guilt is one for a properly informed and directed jury, not for an appellate court. … Where issues have not been fully and fairly considered by a trial jury, determination of guilt is not the task of appellate courts.”

    A curious feature of your report is that it fails to mention how, in 2008, Joe Karam and Michael Reed QC petitioned the Privy Council to acquit David. Law lords deliberated for just five minutes before reaching a decision. They said it was a matter for “the New Zealand courts”.

    It is unclear to whom you are referring when you mention “all of the external judges”. The only external judges that have traversed the evidence are the Privy Council judges and you. However, as mentioned, the Privy Council did not acquit or exonerate David. The Privy Council ordered a retrial and said that David should remain in prison in the meantime. The fact is that the only “external” judge to have rejected the Crown’s arguments in regards to David’s guilt is you. It is unclear why you used or, more correctly, misused the Privy Council judgment in an attempt to bolster your position. That judgment is irrelevant in the context of David’s claim for compensation.

    Binnie doesn’t know which side is up.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  577. Psycho Milt (2,246 comments) says:

    This was a man that was not allowed to live in the house with his family,
    who handed over his wages to his estranged wife, who was left with a pitiful sum for himself,
    whose wife and children were planning a new house he didn’t want,
    a man who was making no headway in his career, despite applying for lots of positions,
    whose ability to do the tasks assigned to his professional position was lacking,
    who couldn’t even manage his own personal hygiene needs,
    who appears to have had little control over anything very much in his life,

    Well, I guess the above is at least as convincing as the stuff about David being a loner weirdo whose career had peaked at newspaper delivery boy, who had very odd relationships with his parents and at least one sister, frequent odd mental episodes, a determination to build a house with him taking his father’s place, a habit of controlling and intimidating his sisters and an expressed interest in using his paper round for an alibi so he could commit a crime – ie, not very.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  578. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    That could explain Dennis’s double hernia Kanz, finding out that the police stood the magazine up for the photograph. What a big shock for such a famous fellow who the army just awarded a medal. That took a long while, maybe they couldn’t find him because he left in a hurry from some difficult situation.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  579. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    Chuck Bird (2,967) Says:

    February 1st, 2013 at 8:57 pm
    I just finished reading “Missing Pieces” by Ian Wishart about how David Tamihere was not given a fair trial. When a new report is done hopefully by a panel that includes someone with a science degree it will be the end of the road for David Bain.

    You guys could do something useful and put your efforts into helping someone who is quite likely not guilty.

    Chuck,
    How come Tamihere was driving round in the Swedish tourists car with all their gear in it without a care in the world?
    Answer. Because he knew they wouldn’t be reporting it missing
    And how did he know that?
    Answer. Because he knew they were dead.
    And how did he know that?
    Answer. Because he had killed them.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  580. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    I’ve heard of the dance of the 7 veils, but how about the dance of 7 blankets?
    It could happen; particularly if you were obsessed about naked young men and even got sketches of one.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  581. Psycho Milt (2,246 comments) says:

    It’s not Bain’s fault that the Dunedin police described what they saw as complete, encompassing heel and toes, prints

    Indeed it’s not Bain’s fault Hentschel described the print as complete despite having no means of knowing whether it actually was or not. But Hentschel must have been correct, right? Surely a prosecution witness couldn’t have been wrong about something?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  582. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    It’s a circumstantial case, which means the question is whether David Bain is more likely to be the murderer, or merely the victim of some unlucky coincidences. If he’s not the murderer, here is the rather astonishing extent of the shit luck he suffered that morning:

    Bad luck that Robin decided to use David’s rifle instead of buying one himself.
    Bad luck that Robin found out where the key to unlock it was.
    Bad luck that Robin decided to use David’s gloves instead of his own.
    Bad luck that the only identifiable suspect’s prints on the rifle were old ones of David’s.
    Bad luck that these hadn’t been smeared by all the activity carried out with the rifle that morning.
    Bad luck that David got victims’ blood in various places on his clothes through innocent transfer.
    Bad luck that glasses he was known to wear were found broken with one piece in the room where the struggle took place.
    Bad luck he told his lawyer and his aunt that he’d been wearing those glasses the day before the murders.
    Bad luck he managed to injure himself that morning in ways consist with having struggled with Stephen.
    Bad luck that Robin decided to change his blood-stained clothes for some tatty old ones before he shot himself.
    Bad luck that Robin managed to clean the blood off his hands without removing the dirt.
    Bad luck that Robin left the blood-stained murdering outfit in the washing basket instead of washing it.
    Bad luck David didn’t notice when he washed the clothes that they were covered in blood and he was getting it on his hands and transferring it to various items in the laundry.
    Bad luck Robin typed a suicide note on the computer instead of hand writing one.
    Bad luck the note amounted to a declaration of David’s moral superiority over the rest of the family.
    Bad luck the spent cartridge from Robin’s suicide ended up in the computer alcove.
    Bad luck that David spent a while freaking out before thinking to call 111.

    The pro Robin’s think that is an unlikely set of circumstances and now most of the pro David’s do as well.
    The penny has finally dropped for most of them.
    Like that old saying “You can fool some of the people some of the time but you can’t fool all the people all of the time”.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  583. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Dennis Horne (588) Says:
    February 1st, 2013 at 8:18 pm
    It doesn’t matter what the police saw, said they saw or anything else.
    ———————————————–

    LOL.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  584. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    Indeed it’s not Bain’s fault Hentschel described the print as complete despite having no means of knowing whether it actually was or not. But Hentschel must have been correct, right? Surely a prosecution witness couldn’t have been wrong about something?

    Two of them must have been wrong in this instance. Weir described it as a footprint you would leave in sand. Sounds pretty complete to me, unless of course both of these men were pissed when they saw it/them.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  585. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    arzuka (6) Says:
    January 28th, 2013 at 11:50 pm
    hi judith, long time no schmaggle bleng!

    Next they’ll be showing Marzuka’s pathetic graphic attempts, that completely ignore the evidence of the blood spatter and the close contact wound. Oh wait a minute, they already have!

    lol, they needn’t resort to that as I’m quite happy to show my “pathetic graphic attempts”. By the way thanks for using one of my pictures – I wonder where those lines correlating blood splatter end up…

    Actually, in all honesty I’m quite proud of noticing that incriminating mark on David’s nose from the morning of the murders that nicely matches the mark nose pads on glasses would make:
    https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-i5OGnHXDbY0/UOKCZrf3E7I/AAAAAAAABiw/O47s61lKA0Y/s800/bain%2520glasses6.jpg

    Also, showing that david’s toeless foot nicely fits with a 240mm toeless print was a bit of a coup:
    https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-26HtE3L6n_Q/UOaKqJ2Lv1I/AAAAAAAABjs/ZX1GBHAK58k/s1200/bain%252520footprint6b.jpg

    and that footlike print in blood that nicely fits david – note direction,orientation footedness all consistent with other prints :
    http://lh6.ggpht.com/_zGKapt7iWLI/TSwQcCcBjaI/AAAAAAAAA5E/Peg0aFvCwcU/s0/bain%20footprint%20combo%20med.jpg
    animated comparison:
    http://lh3.ggpht.com/_zGKapt7iWLI/TS7CQbpr_yI/AAAAAAAAA58/hLmE5a_Ba0Q/s0/bain-foot-anim3.gif

    Notto mention my murder sim in glorious html5-o-vision, showing the unlikeliness of the defense’s suicide scenario with respect to robin’s final resting position – note sim example of robin taking defensive action quite reasonable:
    http://marzuka.x10.mx/trademe/javascript/bain%20sim%201.06/bain%20sim.htm

    and of course there is my physics model of the blood splatter with regards to the position and orientation of the rifle which is quite interesting too….

    Like they say, you can run but you can’t hide. I say, bring on the hyper AI of future Justice Watson 5.0, then we’ll talk balance of probabilities tending to the infinitesimals against…

    cheerio

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  586. gamefisher (416 comments) says:

    quote”I don’t care about the incest. It doesn’t explain the forensics.
    What I want to know is how a man shoots himself without smudging pristine prints on the muzzle of the rifle, by far the most natural place to hold it when guiding it to the left temple. Why his prints are not on the rifle, somewhere. Why David’s prints are but don’t count. Yeah, yeah, they’re old. Like an old wives’ tale.
    I want to know how the blood spot got onto the left index fingernail when that hand was supposedly at the trigger.
    I want to know how many men in a million would get up and fight and strangle and shoot and change and wash and still hold 400ml urine.
    I want to know why anyone would think Robin wouldn’t just kill himself if he were feeling guilty about incest.
    I want to know why he spared only David, the arsehole who locked him out of the lounge/computer alcove.
    I want to know why anyone in his right mind would believe Robin typed the immature self-serving message on the computer when he had all night to write a letter explaining himself.
    And if one senior judge in the whole country believes this crap I’d be very surprised.” unquote

    A brief but good summary.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  587. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    What a spammer!

    All the dickleheads have got left.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  588. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    Judith
    You said that the correct spelling of Kaycee’s name was in the retrial transcript.
    It wasn’t. You lied.
    You said it was spelt correctly in a newspaper .
    It wasn’t . You lied.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  589. Rowan (1,778 comments) says:

    Muggins
    Noone gives a flying f*** how to spell the dogs name, stop spamming kiwiblog with all your bs! you have demonstrated time and time again what a pathetic liar you are! seriously get help!

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  590. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Oh look, the dog poop experts have arrived.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  591. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Give it a break Rowan, it could be quite important to know how to spell the dog’s name if you were going to one of them shows.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  592. Rowan (1,778 comments) says:

    Chuck @ 8.57
    I’ve just finished it as well, was better than his previous conspiracy theory about the Thomas case, Ian is a good read but I don’t know about some of his conclusions. I don’t believe Tamihere got a fair go but I don’t know about innocence, certainly not BRD for me.
    Maybe you could look at the Bain case with a bit more of an open mind, you seriously let the so called ‘goat shagging’ story decide the case for you?, case for prosecution is just to weak and full of holes.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  593. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    gamefisher (381) Says:
    February 1st, 2013 at 9:42 pm

    I don’t care about the incest.

    Another pedo lover, must be a few of them around. At least 550, they all belong to JFRB. Some are pedo lovers, but there must be a fair few who are pedos themselves.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  594. gamefisher (416 comments) says:

    This is a new one

    quote”I want to know why anyone in his right mind would believe Robin typed the immature self-serving message on the computer when he had all night to write a letter explaining himself.”

    As well as that he could of had 20 minutes (+-5) spare to write a note before he was meant to of turned the computer on.

    Let the D Bain team BS flow in increasing amounts.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  595. Rowan (1,778 comments) says:

    Weak argument Gamefisher
    Full of speculation, what if the blood on daddys finger was Stephens, Dempster said it could be consistent with having got there from shooting someone else, also total speculation that ‘David controlled Robins access to the lounge’ been over most of it before, oh and the plonkers favourite argument ‘why’, as if Robin was thinking rationally at the time and had planned anything.
    Gets the usual 0.000000%

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  596. gamefisher (416 comments) says:

    Kanz (868) Says:
    February 1st, 2013 at 9:55 pm

    Quote” gamefisher (381) Says:
    February 1st, 2013 at 9:42 pm

    I don’t care about the incest.

    Another pedo lover, must be a few of them around. At least 550, they all belong to JFRB. Some are pedo lovers, but there must be a fair few who are pedos themselves.”unquote
    That was a qoute of someone elses and you have misquoted it so it is obvious you do not know NZ defamation laws.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  597. gamefisher (416 comments) says:

    Quote”Weak argument Gamefisher
    Full of speculation, what if the blood on daddys finger was Stephens,”

    Yes you are full of ‘speculation’ believing that the blood on Robin finger was Stevens bit like Karam saying the blood on Robins pants was someone else in the family but it wasn’t.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  598. Rowan (1,778 comments) says:

    Psycho Milt
    Rather a lot of speculation in your character assassination of David, any evidence of this that didn’t ‘suddenly turn up 20 years after’ the event by people with an axe to grind or were bullied into making statements by the lynch mob.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  599. Rowan (1,778 comments) says:

    Nice try Gamefisher
    How much of the blood on Robin was tested? none prior to 1995 trial and a minimal amount afterwards, Maybe you could explain the red ‘bloodlike’ staining on his palms and under his fingernails, also the copius amounts of blood on him that didn’t come from his headwound? Nope didn’t think so!

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  600. gamefisher (416 comments) says:

    Quote”Nice try Gamefisher
    How much of the blood on Robin was tested? none prior to 1995 trial and a minimal amount afterwards, Maybe you could explain the red ‘bloodlike’ staining on his palms and under his fingernails, also the copius amounts of blood on him that didn’t come from his headwound? Nope didn’t think so!” Unquote

    Citation or link

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  601. Rowan (1,778 comments) says:

    GF
    If you look in the appendices to D & G in your local library there is a statement by Det Mark Lodge the officer in charge of Robins body, also the photos of Robin lying dead in the lounge, I know you will say it is ‘fiction’ but the photos and reprinted detective statement is all you need to look at. Or are we now to believe the reprinted statement is not authentic and the photos are lying?

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  602. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    Rowan (523) Says:
    February 1st, 2013 at 10:24 pm

    GF
    If you look in the appendices to D & G in your local library there is a statement by Det Mark Lodge the officer in charge of Robins body, also the photos of Robin lying dead in the lounge, I know you will say it is ‘fiction’ but the photos and reprinted detective statement is all you need to look at. Or are we now to believe the reprinted statement is not authentic and the photos are lying?

    Det. Mark Lodge, like Hentschel and Weir, didn’t know what he was seeing. By all accounts a lot of the investigators had the same problems. Jones didn’t know what he saw luminesing, or what colour the ridges of the prints were. Weir didn’t know where he found the lens. Ngamoki didn’t know how to read the measurements on a ruler. Lots of don’t know going on there.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  603. gamefisher (416 comments) says:

    Quote”Or are we now to believe the reprinted statement is not authentic and the photos are lying?” unquote

    Not back to this BS arguement fro 3 years ago what blood is there on Robins hand because in that photo that is not blood on the exterior but blood accumulated in the veins etc being the lowest part of Robin body not covered by clothing.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  604. gamefisher (416 comments) says:

    Quote”Ngamoki didn’t know how to read the measurements on a ruler.” unquote

    A very common mistake with everyone and what guarantees can you give me that Hentschel didn’t make a mistake as well and I have seen many people make mistakes measuring and the difference when the numerical numbers 8 & 9 are invlolved are greater still as they are more easily mistaken. Eg 280 could of been mistaken for 290

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  605. Rowan (1,778 comments) says:

    Lodges statement Gamefisher, or did he get that wrong as well? given his stuff ups in not protecting the hands and clothing before the body was removed is it to much to assume that his notes might be correct?
    Re 10.40 8 inches Gamefisher a reasonable ‘common mistake’

    Kanz, Jones should have realised it was red food colouring under Robins fingernails or as Muggins is ‘certain of’ rust marks from the guttering!

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  606. Psycho Milt (2,246 comments) says:

    Two of them must have been wrong in this instance. Weir described it as a footprint you would leave in sand. Sounds pretty complete to me, unless of course both of these men were pissed when they saw it/them.

    Perhaps you could fill us in on the mechanism they used to establish that it was a genuinely complete print, rather than one that looked complete in that it showed toes and a heel. A 28cm print covers 93% of a 30cm foot. How good do you figure Hentschel, Weir or anyone else is at distinguishing a 93% complete print from a 100% complete one based on luminescence of a piece of carpet?

    Rather a lot of speculation in your character assassination of David…

    You bet your ass, which is why I rated it no more credible than Judith’s character assassination of Robin.

    How much of the blood on Robin was tested? none prior to 1995 trial and a minimal amount afterwards…

    Wrong, and wrong. Not that that surprises me at all.

    If you look in the appendices to D & G in your local library there is a statement by Det Mark Lodge the officer in charge of Robins body…

    Not in my library’s copy there ain’t. Just Cottle’s statement and the judge’s summing up.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  607. Truthiz (185 comments) says:

    David wrote the message on the computer ……. itz that simple …

    :)

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  608. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    ‘Det. Mark Lodge, like Hentschel and Weir, didn’t know what he was seeing. By all accounts a lot of the investigators had the same problems. Jones didn’t know what he saw luminesing, or what colour the ridges of the prints were. Weir didn’t know where he found the lens. Ngamoki didn’t know how to read the measurements on a ruler. Lots of don’t know going on there.”

    Yes all ‘common’ mistakes, like Doyle destroying the blood samples from Robin’s clothes but keeping the clothes with the cut out samples removed. Why would they not have tested them as a matter of routine to establish guilt or innocence, oh that’s right they ‘knew’ who was guilty and didn’t need the evidence. And in every case, an extraordinary co-incidence; everything thrown out or over which there was some mistake always favoured the police case – how extraordinary. Pity they ‘forgot’ to throw out the morgue photos showing the blood on daddy’s palms and his nose bleed, but ‘they’ couldn’t get at them because they were under the control of the Pathologists, honest men not trying to protect themselves or the dead father.

    But the arguments about the evidence are over, just stuff now for the sisters to keep bsing about while the rest off us look ahead to the JR that was never going to happen.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  609. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    @Judith. Please pass this on to your daughter. :)

    A guy is looking for a place in the university library. He asks a girl: “Do you mind if I sit beside you?”

    She replies in a loud voice: “I DON ‘T WANT TO SPEND THE NIGHT WITH YOU!”

    The others stare at him, he is truly embarrassed and finds another table. After a few minutes, she walks over to him and says with a laugh: “I study psychology, and I know what a man is thinking. I guess you feel embarrassed, right?”

    In a loud voice he responds: “$500 FOR ONE NIGHT? THAT ‘S TOO MUCH!” Everybody looks at the girl in shock.

    He whispers in her ear: “I study law, and I know how to screw people.”

    Judith, tell Liz the truth.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  610. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Who is Liz Dennis, have you joined the stalkers of families? Are you trying to intimidate Judith into silence by mentioning the name of somebody you believe to be associated with her? Are your arguments so hopeless that you have become beside yourself with anger and need now to threaten who you believe to children or relatives of other posters who you cannot subdue with either insults or lies, you who claim to be an ex vet.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  611. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    That Truth article was commenting on that double murderers obsession withe pedos, I assume that to mean paedophiles.

    Kanz has a big thing about pedos- any link?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  612. big bruv (13,199 comments) says:

    So..612 comments later have we actually found out if Legal Aid is funding this?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  613. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    big bruv (11,002) Says:
    February 2nd, 2013 at 8:11 am

    So..612 comments later have we actually found out if Legal Aid is funding this?

    ———————————-

    No, legal aid is not funding this which was clearly stated in the initial press release.

    There was no application for legal aid either, and therefore, despite what some have stated, there was no denial of legal aid.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  614. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Dennis Horne (589) Says:
    February 2nd, 2013 at 7:07 am

    —————————

    I will pass the message on to my daughter that you think she knows how to screw people. But I suspect her husband has already complimented her talent in that area. She will probably require more information about her stalker though.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  615. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    Perhaps David’s lawyers work on a contingency basis as they are so confident of success?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  616. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    Judith (1,252) Says:
    February 2nd, 2013 at 8:25 am
    Dennis Horne (589) Says:
    February 2nd, 2013 at 7:07 am

    —————————

    I will pass the message on to my daughter that you think she knows how to screw people. But I suspect her husband has already complimented her talent in that area. She will probably require more information about her stalker though.
    Vote: 0 0
    ………………..
    That’s sick talking about a daughter like that, on a public forum.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  617. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Any progress on measuring a ‘foot?’ Or even on the failed hate campaign.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  618. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    goldnkiwi (188) Says:
    February 2nd, 2013 at 8:29 am
    That’s sick talking about a daughter like that, on a public forum.
    —————————-

    someone’s got a dirty mind then!

    My daughter is very good at making money by charging big fees, her husband loves it. What were you thinking? :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  619. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    Let’s review the evidence against Robin.

    1. There is a rumour about incest. A man who had an arrest warrant out to force him to appear said so. The judge said, “I’m not allowing the jury to hear this crap.”

    2. There is a rumour he was depressed. Not surprising. His wife whom he loved was going insane. His arshole son locked them out of the lounge/computer alcove and threatened them with his rifle. Stephen woke up on morning with David at his bedside going BANG BANG. He was told it was a dream.

    3. There is no forensic evidence. No fingerprints, blood, nothing. The sock prints could be either man’s; Binnie agreed.

    4. A group of supporters “KNOW” he is guilty. “Daddy did it”, they chant. Loonies.

    Have I forgotten anything?

    ==================

    @Klutz. You are a very confused man. On and on you go about paedophilia. Some kind of fascination for you? Paedophilia involves under age children. In NZ and UK the age of consent is 16, in France 15, in Spain 14, in some countries there is no limit, intercourse is forbidden outside marriage.

    I have seen no evidence that anyone here has defended let alone supported paedophilia. Or incest. Sorry we can’t help you on that. Maybe try your priest. You are Catholic, aren’t you?

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  620. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    That you couldn’t possibly have a daughter, else you would not be so crass.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  621. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    goldnkiwi (188) Says:
    February 2nd, 2013 at 8:29 am
    Judith (1,252) Says:
    February 2nd, 2013 at 8:25 am
    Dennis Horne (589) Says:
    February 2nd, 2013 at 7:07 am

    —————————

    I will pass the message on to my daughter that you think she knows how to screw people. But I suspect her husband has already complimented her talent in that area. She will probably require more information about her stalker though.
    Vote: 0 0
    ………………..
    That’s sick talking about a daughter like that, on a public forum.’

    Who says she has a daughter and what business is it of yours. Oh that’s right that’s what that site ‘Guilty’ is set up for.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  622. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    @Klutz. You are a very confused man. On and on you go about paedophilia. Some kind of fascination for you? Paedophilia involves under age children. In NZ and UK the age of consent is 16, in France 15, in Spain 14, in some countries there is no limit, intercourse is forbidden outside marriage.

    I have seen no evidence that anyone here has defended let alone supported paedophilia. Or incest. Sorry we can’t help you on that. Maybe try your priest. You are Catholic, aren’t you?’

    Expert on the subject Dennis? It was only a few minutes ago that you were naming names of those you believed to be the children of other posters. Standing by that?

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  623. knockoutking (21 comments) says:

    goldnkiwi (188) Says:
    February 2nd, 2013 at 8:26 am
    Perhaps David’s lawyers work on a contingency basis as they are so confident of success?

    what a stupid question, kick this ass!

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  624. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    Judith (1,253) Says:

    January 31st, 2013 at 10:21 pm
    muggins (1,852) Says:
    January 31st, 2013 at 10:08 pm
    ———————
    The photo doesn’t show any scratches, and wouldn’t even if they were there. It is of the tattoo, side on, however, it is possible to see that there is no shirt on the chest area.

    Dr Prydes diagram shows the tattoo, which is immediately adjacent to the area where the scratches were said to be by one of the witnesses. Pryde could not have seen the tattoo, without seeing that area of the body adjacent to it. In order to reveal the tattoo, and not any scratches on that side, he would have had to have lifted any blanket up over his head, and kept part of it over his chest, whilst revealing the top of his arm. An entirely difficult procedure and one that would have immediately made anyone suspicious. Especially as in doing that he would have revealed his genitals.

    Of course, there is the possibility that the scratches were on the left side (which will be your next argument as the other witness said they were on that side), except Dr Pryde noted the immunisation scars on the very top of David’s left arm. Again they could not be examined and measured, without lifting the bulk of any blanket upwards, thus revealing everything

    Judith,stop lying.
    There was a photo taken of those bruises on David Bain’s head.
    There was a photo taken of that nick on his knee.

    There were no photos taken of
    [1] David Bain’s hands.
    [2] David Bain’s feet.
    [3] David Bain’s tattoo.
    [4] David Bain’s torso.
    [5] David Bain’s back.
    [6] David Bain’s penis. [ Praise be to God.]
    [7] David Bain’s hairy gunga.

    Dr Pryde could have seen that tattoo while Bain had that blanket draped around his neck and torso.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  625. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    @Judith. Thanks for the laugh, m’Lady. As I’ve said before, there’s nothing as silly as a silly woman.

    Let’s be honest. Your lot have screwed us for millions and want more. I don’t think it was common decency and a sense of proportion that stopped you from applying for legal aid. I think we can all assume you knew you would have been told to fuck off.

    I do hope this matter is heard. It should be. I hope it’s three senior judges. It should be. I do hope it costs an arm and a leg. Do you have a pound of flesh to spare? :) :) :)

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  626. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    what a stupid question, kick this ass!

    Kick it? KICK?
    A wide mouth shovel would only hit one small portion of it.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  627. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    It is a great word ‘guilty’!!!!!

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  628. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Yet more spam.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  629. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    When a Jury says ‘not guilty’ five times it twists the sisters up in knots from which they never unwind. Poor twisted sisters, such lonely souls with their dogs, cats and asses.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  630. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    @Nostalgia. Let’s review the evidence against Robin.

    1. There is a rumour about incest. A man who had an arrest warrant out to force him to appear said so. The judge said, “I’m not allowing the jury to hear this crap.”

    2. There is a rumour he was depressed. Not surprising. His wife whom he loved was going insane. His arshole son locked them out of the lounge/computer alcove and threatened them with his rifle. Stephen woke up on morning with David at his bedside going BANG BANG. He was told it was a dream.

    3. There is no forensic evidence. No fingerprints, blood, nothing. The sock prints could be either man’s; Binnie agreed.

    4. A group of supporters “KNOW” he is guilty. “Daddy did it”, they chant. Loonies. :) :) :)

    Have I forgotten anything? ;)

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  631. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    I have seen no evidence that anyone here has defended let alone supported paedophilia. Or incest. Sorry we can’t help you on that. Maybe try your priest. You are Catholic, aren’t you?

    You want to see where the minds of your mates reside? Try this for and example and see who it is that always moves the conversation to such things.

    There were no photos taken of
    [6] David Bain’s penis. [ Praise be to God.]
    [7] David Bain’s hairy gunga.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  632. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    Juries don’t always say not guilty though do they. ;)

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  633. knockoutking (21 comments) says:

    Nostalgia-NZ (2,771) Says:
    February 2nd, 2013 at 8:46 am
    Yet more spam.

    they hail from the far, far, far, far, far away land of Spam-a-lot

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  634. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Have I forgotten anything? ‘

    Yes you have Dennis. The second Jury heard the incest allegations, in fairly well full detail and they came from shopkeepers, a Doctor and the list goes on. Have you heard the verdict the second jury gave or have you been busy stalking?

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  635. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    What’s upsetting the Banes is, all the nonsense of the Privy Council and costly circus of the second trial DON’T COUNT IN THE CABINET DELIBERATIONS.

    That’s what this is all about. You can fuck with the anachronistic lawyer-serving legal system, BUT KEY AND COLLINS ARE NOT SWAYED BY PROPAGANDA TO ASSUME BAIN IS FACTUALLY INNOCENT.

    Mind you, who is? People too stupid to think for 10 minutes and a bunch of loonies . Lala-de-lala.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  636. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    Yes you have Dennis. The second Jury heard the incest allegations, in fairly well full detail and they came from shopkeepers, a Doctor and the list goes on. Have you heard the verdict the second jury gave or have you been busy stalking?

    He was more likely too busy extracting some poor person’s wallet through his/her mouth, while telling himself he was getting to know them ‘intimately’.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  637. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    It’s got to be a pretty big ass to only have a tiny portion covered by a wide-mouth shovel. How would you measure an ass that big – the width of 15 wide mouth shovels?

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  638. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Nostalgia-NZ (2,771) Says:
    February 2nd, 2013 at 8:37 am
    Who says she has a daughter and what business is it of yours. Oh that’s right that’s what that site ‘Guilty’ is set up for.

    Exactly, she’s just peeved that along with her ‘twisted sisters’ in more almost five years of trying, they have not only been unable to find out who any children might be, they still haven’t come close to finding out who I am, my profession, my contacts and associates, and most of who I work for and why I so strongly support David. She has no idea of whether I even have daughter/s, son’s, an elephant or a tiger or maybe a canary, let alone whether I have ever reproduced. The only thing she does know for sure is I am not a good speller. That must narrow the field down to about 3/4′s of NZ’s population.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  639. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    That’s what this is all about. You can fuck with the anachronistic lawyer-serving legal system, BUT KEY AND COLLINS ARE NOT SWAYED BY PROPAGANDA TO ASSUME BAIN IS FACTUALLY INNOCENT.

    The fools swamping them with the mountain of ‘facts’ taken from counterspin are hoping that they are swayed by propaganda. In fact they are counting on it.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  640. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    What are you trying to ‘intimate’ now?

    Got to love the English language. ;)

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  641. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    @Neuralgia. So, let me see.

    On the one hand we have some rumours of Robin’s incest.

    On the other we have a mass of forensic evidence and circumstantial against David Bain. Blood, fingerprints, silly messages.

    By jove I’ve got it, Robin killed the lot. Left David to verify it. What the fuck? Nutty as fruitcake. Mad as a hatter.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  642. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Dennis Horne (593) Says:
    February 2nd, 2013 at 8:58 am
    What’s upsetting the Banes is,

    What is probably upsetting the Bain’s is, the fact that despite you liking to pass yourself off as some expert on the facts of the case, you can’t even spell their name right!

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  643. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    It’s got to be a pretty big ass to only have a tiny portion covered by a wide-mouth shovel. How would you measure an ass that big – the width of 15 wide mouth shovels?

    Huge.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  644. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    What is probably upsetting the Bain’s is, the fact that despite you liking to pass yourself off as some expert on the facts of the case, you can’t even spell their name right!

    Such feelings of frustration and impotence are causing them to become so irrational that correct spelling is the last thing they think about.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  645. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Dennis Horne (594) Says:
    February 2nd, 2013 at 9:04 am
    @Neuralgia. So, let me see.

    On the one hand we have some rumours of Robin’s incest.

    On the other we have a mass of forensic evidence and circumstantial against David Bain. Blood, fingerprints, silly messages.

    Dennis, calm down. You can’t even spell Bain correctly, what makes you think you have the ability to judge what the evidence is. Fact is, if the evidence was as you say it is, the result from both the Privy Council and the Second Trial would have been very different.

    There is no solid proof, there never has been. The first trial was deemed a ‘miscarriage of justice’ because the evidence and the process was incorrect. You are being sucked in and for a supposedly intelligent man with ‘connections’, you are showing yourself to be an unstable, angry and ignorant fool.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  646. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    @Judith. Really? Having one of your “thick” periods today? You are a bane too, m’lady. :) :) :)

    By the way, “their” is plural. You should say “his” or construct the sentence to avoid disagreement. This lack of attention is very worrying, Not. It explains how your brain malfunctions: compartmentalise. The evidence is in front of your very eyes.

    “THE JUDGE WAS VERY KIND TO ME.”

    “IT IS MY CORE BELIEF I WAS NOT THERE.” Is that a denial or an apple core?

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  647. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    Judith (1,253) Says:
    January 20th, 2013 at 7:22

    Was the animal hurt?

    1. The animal was displaying distress at being restrained.
    2. David did not say Buckley had sex with the goat. (that’s your fantasy) David said Buckley was doing something that was of a sexual nature and looked silly. Flashing a person in public is catagorised as being of a sexual nature by law, so as you can imagine (& seemed to being doing often) there is a huge variety of acts of a sexual nature that do not just include intercourse or shagging as you put it.
    3. No, the type of sexual nature was not clarified in Binnie’s report to the MOJ. It wasn’t the kind of act that is commonly referred to as ‘sex’. Again I point you to the words ‘sexual nature’.
    4. It was neither fondling of the goats sexual genitalia, or the goat fondling the persons genitalia, sexual intercourse or oral sex (by either the goat or the person).
    5. Perhaps a person that doesn’t know the exact details, should stop commenting on it then – namely you! If you are referring to Binnie. I believe he had access to the exact details. He was clearly seeing what David had to say about the incident.
    6. Yes, sex is a very wide concept. I’m glad you have finally accepted that. When you first started raving about the goat incident, you had decided that ‘shagging’

    Judith, one meaning of the word “shagging” is “have sexual intercourse with” so I believe I was entitled to use that word.
    I mean I could have used the word “buggering” but I refrained from doing that.
    So you are saying that Mark Buckley might have “flashed” that goat. I don’t really see the point of anyone “flashing ” a goat. Can you give me any reason why someone would want to do that?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  648. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Dennis Horne (594) Says:
    February 2nd, 2013 at 8:51 am

    Have I forgotten anything?

    Yes, you’ve forgotten how to spell the most used word in this argument. BAIN.

    That’s B – A – I – N.

    How can you trust yourself to get anything right, when you can’t even spell the name of the family whose deaths you are trying to solve?

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  649. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    Dennis Horne (595) Says:

    February 2nd, 2013 at 9:12 am
    @Judith. Really? Having one of your “thick” periods today? You are a bane too, m’lady.

    By the way, “their” is plural. You should say “his” or construct the sentence to avoid disagreement. This lack of attention is very worrying, Not. It explains how your brain malfunctions: compartmentalise. The evidence is in front of your very eyes.

    “THE JUDGE WAS VERY KIND TO ME.”

    “IT IS MY CORE BELIEF I WAS NOT THERE.” Is that a denial or an apple core?

    Apple core.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  650. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    The most stupid bit is that people try to blame David for the allegations of incest, but that was never his evidence it came from others. People, unconnected to one another in many cases and with no reason to lie. However, the main problem is the police deliberately chose not to investigate it. They spent more time ‘investigating’ Joe Karam than what they spent on investigating the prime suspect of both the murders and incest. If anybody could of cleared him it would have been the police instead they chose to hide it – but that didn’t work so perhaps they knew not to take the risk at the outset and that it was better to try and hide it, like the electronic diary.

    We can see by the irrational comments Dennis and others, that for some the incest overshadows all else, but the facts are the forensics, still unexplained after 20 years by the Crown, show that the Jury got it right.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  651. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    It is not I who has the spelling wrong, it’s the whole world:

    bane n.
    1. Fatal injury or ruin: “Hath some fond lover tic’d thee to thy bane?” (George Herbert).
    2. a. A cause of harm, ruin, or death: “Obedience,/Bane of all genius, virtue, freedom, truth,/Makes slaves of men” (Percy Bysshe Shelley).
    b. A source of persistent annoyance or exasperation: “The spellings of foreign names are often the bane of busy copy editors” (Norm Goldstein).
    3. A deadly poison.
    The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2009. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

    Now, how apt is that? :) :) :)

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  652. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    muggins (1,864) Says:
    February 2nd, 2013 at 9:13 am
    ————————-

    Stop trying to be clever Muggins, you can’t do it.

    I have never stated what the act of a sexual nature that looked funny, was.
    I have given you lots of examples of things that can be considered of a sexual nature, that aren’t shagging.

    You can twist and misrepresent what I have said all you like, but you only make yourself look extremely silly. Just like you did yesterday when you reposted a comment that Reed had cross-examined the Police Witnesses at their interviews, when he wasn’t even present in their interviews.

    Get your mind out of the gutter, you have become obsessed with a goat. I am not going to tell you what it was, I prefer to see you squirming. I love the ‘I know something you don’t know’ expression. It really bothers you.

    Don’t address comments about the goat to me again, I will not be telling you what you want to know, I will instead wait for the truth to come out, and see you made a huge fool of.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  653. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    I have seen no evidence that anyone here has defended let alone supported paedophilia. Or incest. Sorry we can’t help you on that. Maybe try your priest. You are Catholic, aren’t you?

    Hey, Dennis, want more recent proof of what thinking excites your mates? Don’t tell me this is a normal thought process when discussing a Judicial review.

    Judith, one meaning of the word “shagging” is “have sexual intercourse with” so I believe I was entitled to use that word.
    I mean I could have used the word “buggering” but I refrained from doing that.
    So you are saying that Mark Buckley might have “flashed” that goat. I don’t really see the point of anyone “flashing ” a goat. Can you give me any reason why someone would want to do that?

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  654. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    Muggins, don’t stop playing the goat, I think Kanz wants to hop on. ;)

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  655. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    And Dennis gives his full approval. Birds of a feather and all that…

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  656. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    The essence of sisters campaign, stalking mixed with lurid sex talk.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  657. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    Dennis is that in response to my ‘competition’ regarding a collective name for David’s supporters? I declare that the winner, albeit the only entry lol congratulations.

    Hopefully it will widely adopted. ‘The Banes’, nothing to do with David or Robin at all, which of course they aren’t.
    Other than hanging on coat tails that is.;)

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  658. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    kimbo says

    Actually, all I did was lay out some facts that are essentially undisputed. There is no speculation and 100% undisputed fact that Robin had to have

    …committed murder/suicide using gloves

    …that belonged to David,

    …even though he was right-handed he did so with his left

    …and killed himself with a rifle with the silencer still attached,

    …and the spent cartridge case ended up in the computer alcove,

    …and there was no blood from the family found on Robin

    …but there was on David,

    …as well as a palm print of David’s that may have been blood on the washing machine

    …which he turned on thus altering evidence that could have identified the killer,

    …and despite a life-and-death struggle in Stephen’s room there was no sign of injury/bruising on Robin

    …but there was on David,

    …who was unable to account for approximately 20 minutes before calling 111,

    …other than lapsing into shock which expert eye-witnesses in shock described as “faking it”,

    …and despite from his own recollection David said he didn’t check all the rooms, he said during the call, “they’re all dead”,

    …despite hearing Laniet gurgling, whose room he said he didn’t check,

    …and whose presence in the house according to the testimony of others David had pressed for,

    …yet he didn’t attend the family meeting which was the pretext for her to David doesn’t attend,

    …but he does recount hearing raised voices while trying to sleep in his bed room,

    …and he had been talking to friends in the weeks leading up to June 20 1994 about a sense of impending doom

    Good post,kimbo.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  659. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    If there’s anything I love more than a fair fight it’s an unfair fight.

    So what can you tell Cabinet about David’s factual innocence?

    1.
    2.
    Buckle my shoe.
    3.
    4.
    Shut the door. No compensation. Goodbye.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  660. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    udith (1,258) Says:
    February 2nd, 2013 at 9:22 am
    muggins (1,864) Says:
    February 2nd, 2013 at 9:13 am
    ————————-

    Stop trying to be clever Muggins, you can’t do it.

    I have never stated what the act of a sexual nature that looked funny, was.
    I have given you lots of examples of things that can be considered of a sexual nature, that aren’t shagging.

    Don’t address comments about the goat to me again, I will not be telling you what you want to know, I will instead wait for the truth to come out, and see you made a huge fool of.

    So you reckon the truth about what act of sexual nature you believe Mark Buckley committed on that goat will come out, Judith? Is David going to announce it on TV? Will he be giving a demonstration of that sexual act? Will there be a live goat there for him to demonstrate on?
    Can’t wait.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  661. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    Robin said: “You killed them.”

    David said: “You don’t have a leg to stand on.” :) :) :)

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  662. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    Dennis Horne (598) Says:
    February 2nd, 2013 at 9:26 am
    Muggins, don’t stop playing the goat, I think Kanz wants to hop on.

    Yeah, that’s the impression I got.
    Just so long as he lets Judith know the time and place,so she can watch and report back.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  663. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Oh here we go again, JFRB singing their same old songs twisting and spinning, whilst spamming the boards with the same old messages from other posters, because they don’t have the intelligence to provide an argument of their own. And then there is the old insane one, who resorts to nursery rhythms because he doesn’t really know the facts of the case.

    How very funny.

    And whilst they are acting like children, the mail arrives, and those results keep coming in that prove the Goat obsessed ex-office boy, has been telling huge – gigantic – enormous porkies.

    I love Saturdays.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  664. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    gamefisher (387) Says:

    Robin Bain the miracle man
    He defied the odds of being 1 out of 30 to shoot himself in the left temple
    He defied the odds of a rifle landing over 30cm 1 out of 14 times
    He defied gravity and landed over 1 meter away from where he should of
    He defieds the odds of not knocking a ammo clip/magazine over by mm’s (finely balance on its curved edge)
    He defied odds by not getting fingerprints on the rifle
    He defied the odd of not putting any indentation in the bean bags by not falling on it despite getting shot by the curtain & chair there.

    Good post,gamefisher.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  665. goldnkiwi (982 comments) says:

    Not to mention what they are doing wrong and how they could do it better. lol ;)

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  666. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    The essence of sisters campaign, stalking mixed with lurid sex talk.

    Correct, they no longer even pretend to be interested in the Bain case. Simply use it to indulge their pornographic fantasies, and prove which gutter they really live in.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  667. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    Judith (1,253) Says:

    January 31st, 2013 at 10:21 pm
    That photo doesn’t show any scratches, and wouldn’t even if they were there. It is of the tattoo, side on, however, it is possible to see that there is no shirt on the chest area.

    Judith,stop lying.

    There were no photos taken of
    [1] David Bain’s hands.
    [2] David Bain’s feet.
    [3] David Bain’s tattoo.
    [4] David Bain’s torso.
    [5] David Bain’s back.
    [6] David Bain’s penis. [ Praise be to God.]
    [7] David Bain’s hairy gunga.

    Judith,you really should not talk about other posters lying.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  668. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    @goldnkiwi. Don’t forget the dance band:

    David and his swinging Banes. ;)

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  669. Dennis Horne (2,059 comments) says:

    Clarification: The “swinging” refers to the monkey business, not any actual hanging. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  670. Truthiz (185 comments) says:

    And so the carousel continues …

    round and round they go …

    where will they end up …..

    Me, its bacon and eggs and then take the missus (hard working lass) out to the beach, a late lunch, then off to the Kingslander for a brew with the lads before going to the park and watching the Phoenix.

    And don’t forget, if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, squawks like a duck, then its probably Judith … :)

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  671. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Why would you mention the names of those you to believe to be other posters children Dennis?
    Simple question.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  672. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    muggins (1,870) Says:
    February 2nd, 2013 at 9:52 am
    —————————-

    Unfortunately for you Muggins, your ship has not only sailed, but it has sunk. You ‘so called’ sources of information have not provided any floatation devices to keep you afloat, in fact, they’ve actually pulled the plug and exposed a very big hole (in your stories)

    You are sunk, dead in the water, exposed, only you are too stupid to realise it.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  673. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    Judith
    I have that interview where Binnie mentions Mark Buckley and,as you say,it is quite long.
    But in the first half Bain only discusses his friendship with Buckley.
    He doesn’t mention the goat until Binnie asks Bain why his friendship with Buckley ended on bad terms and that is when Bain said he saw Bucley performing a deviant act with a goat which he later confirms was an act of a sexual nature.
    ———————-
    Judith says,in reply
    That is correct but prior to that is the clarification that it was something that looked silly. He never actually says he was shagging the goat as you imply, in fact, he never says what it was, and especially that it was as serious as shagging a goat. Had Buckley done anything as physical as you suggest, it certainly would not be classified as ‘looked silly’. I know what it was, and I know what it was is mentioned in the documents given to Binnie, and therefore presume he knows to. I guess you could clarify it as sexual because of what it looked like, but not by what it actually was. For that reason, you are totally wrong and the only people Buckley can have a go at, is the people who have automatically assumed the worse.

    Judith,
    I reckon any act of a sexual nature that was committed on a goat would look silly.
    Are you saying that if vou saw someone shagging a goat it wouldn’t look silly to you?
    It certainly would look silly to me.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  674. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    Truthiz (154) Says:
    February 2nd, 2013 at 10:07 am
    And so the carousel continues …

    round and round they go …

    where will they end up …..

    Me, its bacon and eggs and then take the missus (hard working lass) out to the beach, a late lunch, then off to the Kingslander for a brew with the lads before going to the park and watching the Phoenix.

    And don’t forget, if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, squawks like a duck, then its probably Judith …

    Vote: 20 0.

    Watching the Phoenix? You’re a tiger for punishment.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  675. owlize (2 comments) says:

    ac·quit·tal
    /əˈkwitl/
    Noun
    A judgment that a person is not guilty of the crime with which the person has been charged: “the trial resulted in an acquittal”.
    Synonyms
    absolution – discharge – release – exoneration

    I am astounded at the smoke and mirrors that surrounds this issue. Regardless of which ‘camp’ you are in .. The Privy Council found complete miscarriage of justice in David Bains first trial …. That led to his incarceration for close to 13 years .. and then his release on bail until the second trial (2009) where ALL the evidence was presented and where he was found aquitted … found NOT guilty. Note the meaning of the word ‘acquittal’ above. The claim for compensation for wrongful imprisonment is legitimate and no other person in this land has the right to determine ‘on the balance of probabilities’ David’s innocence or guilt …. to decide to pay or not. What a load of cods wallop !! The NZ legal court system of judge and jury aquitted him of the crimes charged against him. The minister and govt need to stop playing judge and jury … Wasting taxpayers money cherry picking the answer they want. What a witch hunt … I have no faith in our antiquated and biased legal system where in my life time I have seen too many innocent people firstly convicted by the police who are meant to be upholders of the law … But in many instances have been acting judge and jury deciding a persons guilt in the volatile energy and emotional charge of being ‘on the scene’. Corruption of justice starts right there and the ‘apple of their eye’ does not stand a chance. This person has just found themselves in an untenable situation of extreme traumatic experience. Of course they are going to do weird things … Say weird things .. Not remember things … it is natural for the human brain to respond this way as anyone who has suffered extreme trauma will tell you. Why is this country not overhauling the antiquated legal system into a more manageable, fair and transparent court system where all the evidence …not just select bits of it, are presented to the jury ???

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  676. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Psycho Milt (1,084) Says:
    January 30th, 2013 at 6:50 pm

    …given that David Bain doesn’t have a legal right to compensation.

    David Bain, does have a legal right to have the correct process followed though.
    This court case is not about the Compensation as such, it is ensuring the correct process is followed, and it doesn’t appear it was.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  677. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    Kimbo (214) Says:
    January 13th, 2013 at 9:16 am
    @ Judith

    It’s deconstruct Judith’s rationalising again: -

    “You do get carried away with the truth don’t you.
    Firstly, start at the bottom, there was never any suggestion David was planning to rape a jogger. Rape was never mentioned by those witnesses and was inserted by the police – proven. Those two witnesses did not say is was a plan, but more of a ‘I could do this’ type of statement. Again proven in the statements”.

    Overlooking the reality that if you say, “I could do this” (or something to that effect, you are planning. Whether you are simply fantasising, imagining, passing time, or deliberately ticking boxes in your mind about how you will accomplish it, it indicates a state of mind that is prepared to explore a possibility that had similarities to elements of 20 June 1994. Yet again, Judith says, “it’s not red! It’s scarlet!”.

    “The witness who says she saw David intimidating the family with a gun, – again exaggerating, the word intimidation is subjective, and as there is not supporting data, e.g. complaints to the police, action from the parents to limit gun us, no statements by any of the so called ‘intimidated’ people to others, I think the witness is mistaken in what they think they saw”.

    On what authority does Judith get to decide that the testimony and interpretation of a witness, who was there, and reported what she saw, was “subjective”?! Look again at Judith’s explanation above and there is really only one reason Judith has offered – she doesn’t like it as it doesn’t fit her preconception David Bain is innocent….therefore the witness MUST be wrong.

    “David was confused, in shock and no sure what was going on. Any one that thinks that coming home to find your family dead and the house covered in blood would act like a rational and unconfused person lives in a dream world. David’s behaviour was highly consistent with the shock he was under. To have been cool calm and collected would indicate psychopathy, and five experts who have spent lengthy time examining him, have agreed there is no evidence of that in him.”

    Yeah, ok, a possibility. Nevertheless, it doesn’t remove the fact there were witnesses who said David seemed unsure if he could be the killer

    “Whilst some said they think he was feigning a fit, the notes taken at the time by various police and ambulance state exactly that he fainted. Some people changed their story between writing note at the scene and giving evidence on the stand. I’ll leave it to you to decide whether that is lying or not, or simply changing their story to suit the Crowns scenario”.

    Hmmm. A possibility, especially as the witnesses at the second trial were being asked some 15 years after the event to recall, and your memory, certainly in the light of the continual public discussion over the Bain case in the meantime was unavoidable, and that can play on a person’s subconscious. However, that can be said of any and every eye witness, whether they were favourable to David in their recollections of Robin and supposed incest, or hostile. And it ultimately doesn’t detract from the fact that experienced staff on the scene, experts in trauma, who no doubt did suspect he was faking it, wrote up in their notes what they could state as fact as there was no way of knowing for 100% sure he was faking).

    “The evidence proves it wasn’t David that bought Laniet back, but that Arawa drove, and David was a passenger. Does that mean that Arawa is also going to be accused of forcing her sister? Why aren’t there witnesses that state Laniet was forced into the car etc?”

    Rationalising at its finest! This is just shell game semantics. David didn’t have a car, and Arawa didn’t end up the only one alive with the rest of her family dead. And “Why aren’t there witnesses that state Laniet was forced into the car etc?”. Not only is that an argument from silence, but it overlooks the fact that with Arawa there, it resulted in increased psychological pressure on her to go, because not one, but two members of her family had put themselves out to be there to pick her up. It is very plausible, and fits with the manipulative nature of David Bain that he would have roped the unwitting Arawa into his plan to get Laniet back to the home. Notwithstanding, all of Judith’s comments do not detract from the fact witnesses were clear – David had insisted in an aggressive manner that Laniet come back home, and it was aggressive enough to not only disturb her, but also significant enough to warrant mention to others. And then she and all the rest of her family end up dead the next morning, but only David “deserved to stay”

    “David did have scratches on his chest, but not until after the day of the murders. There is NO witness that said he had them on the day and he was strip searched. The bruise was not there when the police and ambulance first arrived and was not noticed until David had fainted and fallen in a position where he had to be dragged out by his feet”.

    Again, arguments from silence. The police and ambulance staff arrive at a chaotic death scene, having to process a myriad of data, starting with establishing there is not an armed gunman present, and if any of the victims are still alive, and we get carping criticism that they didn’t notice injuries straight away – which, like injuries do, can become more apparent over the next 24 hours.

    “There is NO witness that said he had them on the day and he was strip searched”.

    “Re the glasses. there were NO witnesses who saw David wearing his mothers glasses that weekend despite his being at several events and seeing many people”.

    Except David himself, who briefed his lawyer to that effect.

    “The paper run witnesses based their evidence on the times they picked up their papers, they actually could not give the time their papers were normally delivered, only the time they would collect them from the box, and on this morning, they had collected them earlier than normal, so therefore presumed the papers were delivered earlier than normal. When this was pointed out, they agreed. David did complete his run in one of his quicker, but not unusually quicker times. The times of his runs varied, dependent on many factors”

    And yet again we get shell-game sematics and lots of unnecessary details to detract from the fact that, as ross69 said, David finished his paper round earlier than normal – which Judith is acknowledging. And something very significant happened back at 65 Every Street that day. Hands up all those who can tell us what it was, and why, if David was preparing to slay his father, what the incentive to get the run done early was?

    “You have yet to pick muggins up on the countless times he has lied in this thread alone. e.g. David said Buckley shagged a goat. That is a proven lie, muggins is therefore a liar, so shall we now call everything he says is a lie, or shall we assume he was mistaken and accept that sometimes people do make mistakes?”

    Oh, yes, as Judith clarified earlier, ““He didn’t see him having any sort of sex with the goat, he saw him doing an act of a sexual nature that looked silly”. Which is yet another case of rationalising, “it’s not red! It’s scarlet!”.

    Vote: 0 0

    Another good post by Kimbo.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  678. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    lastmanstanding (957) Says:
    January 30th, 2013 at 4:58 pm
    I have yet to have an explaination of what Judge Binnie was required to do. Why was he hired and what was his TORs. It seems that unless his TORs were to determine whether or not Bain should get any compo then there was no earthly reason to hire him. If compo or no compo WTF did my taxes pay for.
    And this bint Collins seems to have no quarms about wasting my taxes on endless reports.

    I suspect she doesnt have the guts to say NO and so hoped that Binnie would say NO for her.

    Yet another of the gutless pollies that we are saddled with.

    I think Collins has shown incredible guts by taking the steps she has. She has effectively ruined her career and desire to one day be PM, by demonstrating her obvious bias in this matter. Had she said ‘no’, based on a report that said ‘yes’, she would have been challenged, so instead she followed a process that excluded the right of the applicant to fair and equitable treatment. She managed the outcome by selection a person she had previously determined what the answer to his ‘claytons’ peer review would be. She has also given the ‘finger’ to a very important and influential international Judge.

    That shows guts, however it also shows stupidity. Now she is facing a heavy court battle, that will cost the tax payer even more money. Another report will still be required, and if she goes with Fisher, it is likely to result in another challenge, due to his lack of impartiality, which will result in yet another report being required.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  679. Psycho Milt (2,246 comments) says:

    The most stupid bit is that people try to blame David for the allegations of incest, but that was never his evidence it came from others. People, unconnected to one another in many cases and with no reason to lie. However, the main problem is the police deliberately chose not to investigate it. They spent more time ‘investigating’ Joe Karam than what they spent on investigating the prime suspect of both the murders and incest. If anybody could of cleared him it would have been the police instead they chose to hide it – but that didn’t work so perhaps they knew not to take the risk at the outset and that it was better to try and hide it, like the electronic diary.

    Wow – the irrationality of the “poor David” theorist in microcosm.
    1. Which people try to blame David for the allegations of incest? Do they exist outside your own mind?
    2. The Police did investigate the obvious suspect, and found that the evidence at the scene pointed very strongly away from him and towards someone else. When assessing the relative merits of physical evidence vs gossip, strangely enough they found physical evidence more compelling.
    3. You’re effectively alleging a criminal conspiracy by the NZ Police, with no basis for it, and let’s repeat that because it’s quite significant, no basis for it other than your firm belief that David is innocent and therefore the Police must have framed him.
    4. The allegation of conspiracy extends to accusing police staff of hiding diaries to prevent the “truth” of David’s innocence coming out – criminal misconduct which would be impossible to keep secret and from which the officers taking such a ridiculously high risk would have nothing to gain.

    Taking the above into account, it’s hardly suprising that you also accuse others of a “hate campaign” while sneeringly referring to Robin Bain as “daddy.” Irrationality and hypocrisy often go together.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  680. Psycho Milt (2,246 comments) says:

    David Bain, does have a legal right to have the correct process followed though.

    Karam and Reed may believe the judiciary will have an opinion on what the correct process is for Cabinet to make a decision that’s entirely discretionary, but it strikes me as more likely they just consider it a useful delaying tactic.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  681. gamefisher (416 comments) says:

    quote”David Bain, does have a legal right to have the correct process followed though.
    This court case is not about the Compensation as such, it is ensuring the correct process is followed, and it doesn’t appear it was.”unquote

    And what part of the process wasn’t followed?

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  682. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    I see now, Collins has appointed a friend of the family to the role of director of human rights proceedings, against the advice of officials.
    She really does see herself as running this country her way. Having people who owe favours in roles that can make decisions she wants. Just how stupid does she think the NZ public are?

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  683. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    Collins will be the next Prime Minister, I reckon.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  684. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    Collins will be the next Prime Minister, I reckon.

    Only if the national party and the voters are as stupid as you are. If you are happy with corruption at the highest levels, then you are on your own. Well, not maybe on your own there will be a few more simpletons to join you, but they are in the minority.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  685. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Psycho Milt (1,107) Says:
    February 2nd, 2013 at 10:45 am
    ————————-

    Of course part of it is to delay the process from going any further until concerns has been addressed. That is obvious and confirmed by the request that Ms Collins halt all action until the JR is completed.

    No great secret there, sunshine.

    However, regarding the other reasons for the review, I am very sure that Prof. Joseph would not be adding his name to this, if he was not convinced, firstly that it is the right thing to do, and secondly, that the Judiciary will feel the same way, that the process undertaken by Ms Collins, especially regarding the unfair manner in which she included some parties, but not others, was fundamentally flawed, and ‘did not follow the basic requirement that the process be equitable’.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  686. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Kanz (880) Says:
    February 2nd, 2013 at 11:04 am
    I see now, Collins has appointed a friend of the family to the role of director of human rights proceedings, against the advice of officials.
    She really does see herself as running this country her way. Having people who owe favours in roles that can make decisions she wants. Just how stupid does she think the NZ public are?

    ———————————

    She is obviously taking her measure of the NZ Public stupidity from the correspondence she receives from Muggins. She thinks they are all as stupid as him. However, she does support that decision from the correspondence she gets from KP, VP, and the twisted sisters. They all reconfirm her belief, by offering examples of just how stupid they are.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  687. owlize (2 comments) says:

    I guess the ‘did he … Didn’t he is going to continue till the end of time. One point I would like to make about the debate as to it wasn’t murder / suicide …. ‘why would Robin Bain shoot himself thru left temple when he is right handed? he couldn’t reach the trigger ‘ …..
    The trigger is some way along the entire length of the rifle …. the right hand can reach around so the thumb can push the trigger back. If the person is kneeling on the ground … The rifle butt can rest on the ground …. it doesn’t have to be held by the left hand … leaving fingerprints … How do I know ??? because my son died by suicide using a high powered rifle, just like this.

    He has been found not guilty of the murder of his family …. His first trial was flawed with serious issues of mistrial. He spent 13 years in prison. I wish this country as a whole would just step forward and compensate the man so he can get on with the rest of his life … Which no doubt will have to be elsewhere in this world if he is to have any semblance of ‘normal’ life. After what he has suffered / been through / experienced it is extremely important to note he is not insane.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  688. Kanz (1,222 comments) says:

    She is obviously taking her measure of the NZ Public stupidity from the correspondence she receives from Muggins. She thinks they are all as stupid as him. However, she does support that decision from the correspondence she gets from KP, VP, and the twisted sisters. They all reconfirm her belief, by offering examples of just how stupid they are.

    If she sees them as representative of the Kiwi voter, then it is easy to see where her arrogance of ‘knowing better’ comes from.
    Most people watch to see how far things are taken, then vote accordingly. Rather than interfere with the process, they observe the pollies and vote according to the integrity they see displayed.
    Lots of bad news here for National and in particular Collins.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  689. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    did not follow the basic requirement that the process be equitable’.

    Judith I don’t think that there is any written requirement that the process be fair or equitable, rather it’s taken as a given, and an expectation that it should be plainly evident. That’s getting right to the heart of this – the fairness expected of an executive decision. Collins has kept repeating whose decision it is, in fact she should not only have been keeping all parties informed and active in the process but publicly make her role clear as neutral, not beating the drums about who was boss. She doesn’t seem to even mildly appreciate the gravity of exercising a political power.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  690. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    Psycho Milt. You joined the debate 5 weeks ago according to you. Therefore you shouldn’t assume you know anything about what allegations have been made by some of the idiots of your ‘side’, the twisted sisters, have previously said, such as that David should have pleaded guilty and served his time to save the good name of the family. They like you are idiots, but you more so because they are at work here everyday telling lies, explaining phone calls and coming up with mantras and you can’t work that out.

    If the diary isn’t hidden where is it? Try learning more about the case if you want to defend daddy.

    I have all the proof I need regarding the inquiry teams behaviour because it has been ruled by our Highest Court to have been a MOJ, what part of that don’t you understand? Anyway you stick with the animal ‘stories’ they’ll be less challenging for you.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  691. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Nostalgia-NZ (2,777) Says:
    February 2nd, 2013 at 11:44 am
    —————————-

    You are right, there isn’t a written requirement, it is something that underlines every process, regardless of whether it is guided by legislation or not.

    Collins is too arrogant to appreciate the damage she is doing but the whisper in John’s ear is ‘get rid of this NOW’. If he doesn’t and it is still active in 2014, regardless of what the decision, it will work against him, and he knows it. Better to end it now, and hope it is forgotten, than risk it being foremost in the public’s mind and risk disrupting his very tenuous hold on power.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  692. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Psycho Milt (1,107) Says:
    February 2nd, 2013 at 10:39 am

    and

    Psycho Milt (1,105) Says:
    February 1st, 2013 at 10:42 pm
    You bet your ass, which is why I rated it no more credible than Judith’s character assassination of Robin.

    Comments like that from you really make me laugh.

    Robin Bain had been a strong caring man, whose three greatest loves were his God, his family, and teaching.

    In PNG, he held a top position in his career. He was doing the work of his ‘God’, and surrounded by his young children, living in a manner he enjoyed. He was young, fit and healthy, had everything he needed provided, and was able to do well financially.

    Then he returned to New Zealand, against his wishes.

    His wife, who once shared his love of his ‘God’, lost her faith and began to worship alternative spiritual beings. A vast contrast to Robin’s beliefs.

    His children became teenagers, and like most teenagers, started to become independent, no longer ‘needing’ him as much as they used to.

    In his professional capacity, he had to take a teaching position well below his previous one. It is well documented how this was very difficult for him. He constantly applied for higher positions, but was never successful. He took that rejection poorly and demonstrated his frustration.

    As a man of deep religious conviction, he believed in the sanctity of marriage, but his wife rejected him, he was removed from the marital bed, from handling the family finances, from being the head of the family. He even had to argue to for use of a chainsaw. In short, he was disenfranchised, made to suffer the embarrassment of sleeping in a caravan on his own property, a physical symbol of the decline in his status.

    His situation began to affect his health, he lost weight, looked gaunt, was described as cadaver like, and physically smelled from lack of hygiene. He presented to friends and colleagues as anguished and agitated, and even though his doctor would not release his medical records, people with qualifications in psychology, described him as depressed. His brother noted the negative change in him.

    It also affected his ability to do his job well. He demonstrated some poor judgement, made bad decisions as a teacher, and failed dismally to do the tasks required of him as a principal. As the paperwork mounted, it was obvious that catching up was never going to happen.

    Robin Bain was a good man, no one is disputing that. But he was a man that didn’t adapt to change, and aging failed to provide anything positive for him. As the world moved on around him, Robin didn’t keep up, couldn’t keep up and fell behind.

    Perhaps as his affections were rejected by his wife, he turned to his daughters, and allowed fatherly love to become something else, we do not know for sure, but Laniet became a very troubled girl.

    Whether there was incest or not, doesn’t matter, the accusation of it, something that went against his three strongest principles – his religion, his family and his teaching – could have been the final push that saw him tumble over that thin edge of sanity. An edge he had been wobbling on the top of for some time.

    What annoys me most is those who claim to want Justice for Robin Bain. Who insist in applying the measure of a ‘right mind’ when considering the probability of his final acts.
    Where were they when he needed them? Where was that brother that noticed he was struggling, but willingly put him on a plane to return alone to a life he was clearly not handling? Why didn’t those colleagues who noted his struggling do something to help him? Where was that ‘aunty’ and sister that remembers so much word for word, but couldn’t be bothered calling on the family to offer support; instead distancing herself from a marriage in trouble? Where were the community; the friends, the colleagues, and the extended family who now like to pretend nothing was ‘so bad’?

    For most of his life Robin had been a wonderful man, but that changed. I do besmirch the characters of people that knew him, and if anyone is to blame it is those people, who through their ignorance, their judgmental attitudes, their embarrassment, their laziness and their sheer snobbery, failed to step up and help when it was so obviously needed. They are the ones with blood on their hands, and sadly many of them are also members of JFRB.

    One All Black has been prominent in this case, but just maybe a few of you should start to listen to another All Black, John Kirwan. Because until some of you start to look and accept what depression did to Robin, then these types of tragic events will continue to happen. It does not matter that there wasn’t an official diagnosis, any fool, even an old one cannot deny Robin Bain was struggling, and he was no longer a man with the strength of character, he once had

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  693. twistedlemon (110 comments) says:

    I miss the postings of Kimbo and Nookin.

    Kimbo neatly dissected Judith’s comments and revealed them for the quarter truths and non-truths they are.

    Nookin is always pertinent and cuts to the chase with ease.

    Any genuine requests for information or discussion are met with prevarication and undeserved derision by team Bain-Karam.
    The Counterspinners are merely providing them with a platform for their propaganda.

    Raise the game or let the thread die.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  694. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    twistedlemon (77) Says:
    February 2nd, 2013 at 12:39 pm (77)
    ———————–

    Are you meaning lies, like this one of yours

    twistedlemon (77) Says:
    February 1st, 2013 at 11:47 am
    When Binnie was interviewing David, the defence team (in the person of Reed) was allowed to examine Bain and cross-examine the police witnesses.

    The prosecution was not allowed this same right.

    Reed was not present at the Police interviews.
    Ms Markham was asked if she wished to cross-examine at David’s interview, but declined.

    Doyle’s Interview
    Date of Interview: 1 9 July 2012
    Place : John Wickliffe House, Dunedin
    Attendees Annabel Markham (Crown Law Office)

    Weir’s interview

    Date of Interview: 19 July 2012
    Place: John Wickliffe House, Dunedin
    Attendees Annabel Markham (Crown Law Office)

    Bain’s interview

    Date of Interview: 23 July 2012
    Place: Copthorne Hotel , Auckland
    Attendees: John Pike and Annabel Markham (Crown Law Office)
    Michael Reed CQ
    Matthew Karam
    Joe Karam
    Stuart McGilvray (Ministry of Justice)

    Nothing but a complete lie from you.

    What was that you were saying about requests for information? Well there is your straight answer, no propaganda in that.

    Perhaps you need to raise your own game, currently it’s sitting in the gutter.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  695. Nostalgia-NZ (4,896 comments) says:

    What crap, all daddy’s team are doing is spamming the boards, stalking and talking about lurid sex after making outrageous claims about evidence they can’t resolve – same as they’ve always done.

    Nookin would never be a member of CS and kimbo was an expert at painting himself into corners.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  696. Rowan (1,778 comments) says:

    I see the goat fker can’t even come up with his own posts any more and has to repost Kimbos used toilet paper, LMAO

    Psycho Milt
    Try looking at the actual evidence, re the blood staining on Robin you are just in denial, there were significant amounts not collected or tested, try qualifying some of your statements ie ‘The Police did investigate the obvious suspect’ really yet they had done no testing of any of the blood samples and didnot protect his body and burnt down the house and all remaining evidence after 3 weeks.
    Remember the ESR found traces that could have been David Doughertys semen in the girls underpants, and he was found to be innocent.
    Heres a link to some of the blood staining on Robin, maybe you could explain how it came from his ‘head wound’? won’t be suprised when your lame attempt gets the usual 0.0000%!
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/2294937/Detective-did-not-act-by-the-book

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  697. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    Judith (1,266) Says:

    She is obviously taking her measure of the NZ Public stupidity from the correspondence she receives from Muggins. She thinks they are all as stupid as him. However, she does support that decision from the correspondence she gets from KP, VP, and the twisted sisters. They all reconfirm her belief, by offering examples of just how stupid they are.

    You are quite right,Judith.
    Everytime I send JC anything I get a letter back saying ” Stop sending me this information, muggins, you stupid old git. What makes you think I need your advice when I am quite capable of working out that David Bain is guilty by myself.
    It is bad enough having Karam in my ear without you as well. Please desist, you silly old fool”.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  698. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    Rowan (525) Says:

    February 2nd, 2013 at 1:25 pm
    I see the goat fker can’t even come up with his own posts any more and has to repost Kimbos used toilet paper, LMAO

    I had no idea David Bain was posting on kiwiblog.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  699. Jacob Cohen (44 comments) says:

    Judith 12:10

    Unfortunately a similar tale of woes could be ascribed to David’s mental health – as reflected in his words in Karam’s booklet Innocent saying “being constantly crushed by shattered dreams, destroyed plans, broken promises and betrayals, by all I once held dear”.

    Speculation of David or Robin’s mental disposition, without medical records, get you not one iota nearer the truth.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  700. Rowan (1,778 comments) says:

    Sound words, Why don’t you follow your own advice Muggins?
    “Please desist, you silly old fool”

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  701. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    http://www.whaleoil.co.nz/2013/02/caption-contest-25/

    Judith gets a mention on whaleoil’s caption contest.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  702. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    Kimbo (214) Says:

    @ Judith

    “…you can’t provide an explanation regarding the fact that Robin committed suicide, and for the Crown’s acceptance of that fact.”

    Because you have yet to provide, despite being asked on numerous occasions, for the photos that show the blood splatter on the curtains in a “downward trajectory, as a result of falling from a height above it and consistent with the source being in front of the curtain”, and support from experts to support your interpretation of the alleged physical evidence.

    @ Dennis Horne

    I admire your willingness to go the go the extra mile with Judith on this matter, including conducting your own private research. Might I suggest, based on Judith’s track record, clear axe to grind, agenda-setting leading questions, and failure to put up or shut up, that you are dealing with someone using the same modus operandi as a cold-reading psychic. Chase this likely chimera, and you can be very sure, once it proves elusive, you don’t need to worry, as, just like a bus, there will be another coming along very shortly. The ball is in Judith’s court, and has been for over 24 hours since she led with this yesterday morning. It should be a relatively straight-forward matter to produce it, rather than evasions of questions, including the most obvious of all that you pointed out, “Why didn’t Binnie see it this way”. But then I’m sure I’m not telling you anything that hasn’t occurred to you already…

    But then I could be wrong, and maybe Judith really does have expert opinion that premonitions of doom and “black hands coming to get me” is eye witness testimony from spirit world exonerating David.

    Kimbo bowls Judith around her legs.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  703. Psycho Milt (2,246 comments) says:

    If the diary isn’t hidden where is it?

    PCA/Police Bain Review Report, 1997, para 236:

    f) Missing Diary

    Mr Karam refers to Cottle saying he thought Laniet had a list of all
    her clients in her personal diary and adds “this diary along with
    many other items appears to have disappeared.”
    [italics in original]

    On 24 June 1994, during the course of the search of the bedroom in
    which Laniet Bain was found, Police located a battery operated
    calculator in the pocket of a leather jacket. Its mechanism
    included a clock and a telephone memo. Stored in the memo were
    a series of names and telephone numbers. These were all
    checked. Some of the telephone numbers showed no subscriber
    details. It appears that this is the electronic diary referred to by
    Karam, which “appears to have disappeared”. It was held by the
    Police until it was returned to the Trustees on 19 January 1996.
    There is no record of other items missing as alleged.

    g) Supposed Telephone List of Clients/Acquaintances

    Apparently this is one of the other items Mr Karam believes may
    have “disappeared”.

    In June 1994, Michael Bain located at the house at Taieri beach a
    book allegedly belonging to Laniet with a series of names and
    phone numbers in it This was given to the Police during the
    investigation and the telephone numbers checked. It was finally
    returned to the Trustees on 19 January 1996.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  704. Psycho Milt (2,246 comments) says:

    I have all the proof I need regarding the inquiry teams behaviour because it has been ruled by our Highest Court to have been a MOJ, what part of that don’t you understand?

    I understand it perfectly. If the Police errors had not been made, the jury could perhaps have reached a different verdict. That made the first trial a miscarriage of justice. It most definitely does not mean the Privy Council endorses your delusions about a criminal conspiracy by the NZ Police.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  705. Nookin (3,031 comments) says:

    Nost NZ

    What is CS?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  706. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Jacob Cohen (12) Says:
    February 2nd, 2013 at 1:41 pm
    —————–

    The problem with your example of David’s writing, is that it was written well after the events, and whilst he was incarcerated. Of course he was depressed, disappointed, upset, his dreams were shattered, his plans destroyed (he had aspirations of finishing Uni and starting a career) promises made by others broken to him, by people he held dear – perhaps dear Aunty played in role in that. Perhaps he was referring to his father who killed his family. There are many examples of promises that were broken by people he held ‘dear’.

    You are really grabbing at straws trying to associate that historically, when it was written at a time of obvious anguish. However, coming up with that piece does place you firmly on the inside of JFRB – it is one of their favourite pieces of information they like to misrepresent.

    A professional diagnosis doesn’t matter, Robin displayed sufficient behaviours that you cannot ignore as ‘one offs’.

    In the period leading up to the deaths, Robin was unstable, his behaviour around others and the manner in which he conducted himself in his personal and professional capacity, cannot simply be excluded just because a doctor didn’t sanction it. Doctors aren’t always informed of what their patients are doing outside a consultation. There were plenty of witnesses of excellent integrity and professional standing to Robin’s struggle. So you statement doesn’t stand.

    David had a debt of $2000.
    He had finally found a course of study he loved and was doing very well in.
    He had a girlfriend for the first time.
    He was involved in a number of musical and community productions, which he enjoyed.
    He was physically fit, training for marathons, and had finally found a group of friends he felt at ease with.
    He was a bossy big brother,
    He argued with his father over the chainsaw.

    So tell me, with all the behaviours that Robin displayed and an analysis of his position, do you really believe he was a fine, stable upstanding specimen of mental wellbeing?

    Robin was certainly the person most likely to succeed, at losing it!

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  707. Psycho Milt (2,246 comments) says:

    Judith (1,267) Says:
    February 2nd, 2013 at 12:10 pm

    Well, yes, I see you can elaborate on your narrative to whatever extent needed. As you may recall, James McNeish was able to elaborate his narrative about David’s mental state to a significant part of an entire book – and yet, I’m quite sure you’re able to figure out that that is not a reason to find his speculation any more convincing. McNeish at least accepts that he’s speculating, whereas you adopt the traditional propagandist’s approach of sprinkling enough facts among the speculation to give an undiscerning reader the impression of truth.

    Where was that brother that noticed he was struggling, but willingly put him on a plane to return alone to a life he was clearly not handling? Why didn’t those colleagues who noted his struggling do something to help him? Where was that ‘aunty’ and sister that remembers so much word for word, but couldn’t be bothered calling on the family to offer support; instead distancing herself from a marriage in trouble? Where were the community; the friends, the colleagues, and the extended family who now like to pretend nothing was ‘so bad’?

    Have you considered at all, perhaps even momentarily before dismissing it as wildly unlikely, that perhaps the reason Robin Bain’s family, colleagues and friends didn’t stage some kind of intervention to address his mental problems was because they had the advantage of assessing his mental state through actually knowing him, rather than through your supposedly superior method of reading Joe Karam’s books?

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  708. Rowan (1,778 comments) says:

    Muggins
    You are just making yourself look sillier and sillier by reposting Kimbos used toilet paper, Kimbo like you was good at manipulating what people say and twisting and avoiding the questions, the subtotal of the evidence put forward by him being 0.000000% (again). You have already proven that you are the biggest liar on KB, congratulations!, yes now Judith Collins will be the next PM, she has about as much chance as you! LMAO

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  709. Rowan (1,778 comments) says:

    Psycho
    Touch of desperation resorting to McNeish, he was clearly out of his depth despite his best efforts at being a shrink, MOS is psychological BS, in a way it is good at convincing the reader the opposite of what it is arguing (much like muggins)

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  710. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    muggins (1,876) Says:

    Kanz
    I agree with you that the spelling of the dogs name is not important.
    As I have already explained to both Judith and Rowan,
    My reason for telling you the correct spelling of the dogs name and the fact that I knew she had five puppies in her first litter was so you would realise I had inside information.
    If I have been told how the dogs name was spelt, then when I say that David kicked Arawa when she was lying on the ground I am right about that as well.
    When I say that Margaret had a strict rule that hand-knitted woolen jerseys were always to be washed by hand I am right about that as well.
    When I say that David Bain knew his sister was a prostitute long before he was arrested I am right about that as well.
    When I say that David’s parents took him to Darwin for psychiatric assessment I am right about that as well.
    When I say that David lied three times about that tattoo I am right about that as well.
    When I say that David’s dog Sacha was put down following complaints about it’s aggessive behaviour I am right about that as well.
    When I said that David told his aunt that he had left earlier on his paper round that morning and that he had run all the way I am right about that as well.
    When I said that Margaret and Robin had resolved their differences and that the demolition of the house was imminent I am right about that as well.
    When I said that it was suggested to David that he wear a jacket or a suit to the funeral and he said he would be wearing his Harlequin jersey I am right about that as well.
    When I said that David had not invited any extended members of his family to speak at the funerals and that only teachers from Bayfield College would I am right about that as well.
    When I said that David wanted his parents cremated and his siblings buried I am right about that as well.
    When I said that David stated the grave should be for four as he wanted to be buried with the children and that he even stipulated the positioning of each body within the grave, Arawa with Stephen and he with Laniet I am right about that as well.
    When I said David stipulated that the caskets should be made of oak and have brass handles I am right about that as well.
    When I said that David wanted to celebrate Arawa’s birthday by inviting friends to go out to the grave ,play some music and dance there,I am right about that as well.
    That is why I told you the correct spelling of Arawa’s dogs’ name.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  711. Rowan (1,778 comments) says:

    Yes we know Muggins
    The ‘inside source’ of information being your arse, as usual are you right about anything? no
    LMFAO
    We however are right in that you are a delusional twit badly in need of pyschiatric help. Good luck with that!

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  712. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Psycho Milt (1,110) Says:
    February 2nd, 2013 at 2:04 pm

    Have you considered at all, perhaps even momentarily before dismissing it as wildly unlikely, that perhaps the reason Robin Bain’s family, colleagues and friends didn’t stage some kind of intervention to address his mental problems was because they had the advantage of assessing his mental state through actually knowing him, rather than through your supposedly superior method of reading Joe Karam’s books?

    —————————–

    I have read the trial transcripts and every official document released, pertaining to this case, have you?

    My opinion is based on them, not karam’s books. I actually disagree with some of Joe’s conclusions.

    If you read what the witnesses had to say, if you examine the evidence produced by the photos, the records of education dept, etc, it is clear. You can attempt to discount it in any manner you like, but my account of Robin is taken from the evidence, such as Margaret’s diaries, the factual information of Robin’s Education Board record, his addresses, his physical appearance as stated by people who had seen him, records of his employment applications, his bank records, school publications, evidence of his religious affiliations, testimony from family, and friends etc and his diary – all of it is available on record.

    None of those that recognised the problems Robin had, stood up and said we didn’t think he needed help.

    McNeish made a diagnosis, one that he had neither the qualification or experience to do, and one that he has been proven no less than by five experienced professionals, to be wrong. Mc Neish started his book ‘ on a Tuesday’, that set the scene.

    Point out any factual detail in my analysis, that was not offered in evidence by witnesses or record.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  713. Judith (7,443 comments) says:

    Rowan (529) Says:
    February 2nd, 2013 at 2:21 pm

    ——————–
    Oh he did have some inside sources, trouble is, what they told him and what he says they told him is very different. He is about to learn a very very big lesson about what happens when he tells someone ‘this is between you and me’, and what happens when you misrepresent what that person says by publishing it on the internet.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  714. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    Judith (1,267) Says:

    My reason for telling you the correct spelling of the dogs name was so you would realise I had inside information.
    ——————————————

    What a load of unadulterated rubbish. Kaycee’s name has been published in newpaper articles.

    You must have a very long nose.

    And after I pointed it out to Judith the reason why I had mentioned the correct spelling of the dogs name it upset her so much she lied. She said it had been published in newspaper articles.
    It had not.
    So Judith’s already very long nose got longer.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  715. Psycho Milt (2,246 comments) says:

    Point out any factual detail in my analysis, that was not offered in evidence by witnesses or record.

    The successful propagandist presents and frames the facts to suitable dramatic effect, and sprinkles in a few non-factual but extremely damaging phrases prefaced with “in short” or “perhaps.”

    I could never be arsed engaging in a similar exercise for David Bain, but it’s obvious enough how you could draw up a suitable narrative from “facts” alleged by witnesses:

    Loner; bullied at school; described as a bit weird; claimed to experience trances and constant deja vu; smothered by his mother, influenced by her deranged religious ideas and drawn into her unrealisable fantasy about a new house that would exclude Robin Bain and yet be funded by him; holder of an idealised view of his family that was impervious to reality; discussed how he could use his paper round as an alibi for a crime; a failed student; an unemployment beneficiary; never held a job of higher rank than paper boy; in financial difficulty; had a “premonition” of something terrible happening a few days before it did.

    You seem to have a lot of time on your hands for reading trial transcripts, witness statements and the like, Judith – why don’t you have a go? There’s plenty to work with there.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  716. muggins (2,983 comments) says:

    Judith (1,267) Says:

    Judith
    When you get back from wherever it is you have been could you please link to any article where the dogs name is spelt correctly.
    ————————–

    My message that I was going for a while was to Rowan.

    Secondly your question regarding the dogs name, well to save me going to the bother to look it up, it is published on JFRB and on Counterspin, it has also been published on davidbain.freeforums and guilty.freeforums, and in all those places whilst you have been one of the publishers you are not the only publisher, nor were you the first publisher of it on at least two of those sites. I note it has also been published on nostalgia-nz.blogspot and unspinningmoments.blogspot.

    It has also been spelt correctly twice in the trial transcripts and incorrectly the other times.

    So it appears you do not have the ‘insider’ knowledge you like to claim you do.

    Then Judith dug herself deeper in a hole by saying it had been spelt twice correctly in the trial transcripts.
    It had not. Another lie.
    An even longer nose for Judith.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  717. twistedlemon (110 comments) says:

    Psycho Milt picks up the gauntlet – and wins convincingly.

    Judith can only respond with the usual Team Karam-Bain techniques – (to quote Tom Scott) ” discounting testimony and discrediting any evidence that doesn’t suit.”

    Roll of honour:
    Kimbo
    Nookin
    Psycho Milt

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  718. Psycho Milt (2,246 comments) says:

    Oh – and for Rowan’s benefit, seeing as he seems to have the reading comprehension of a primary school student: the above comments re David Bain are offered to point out Judith’s foolishness, not to suggest that a narrative based on those “facts” would accurately describe David Bain.

    Vote: Thumb up 4