General Debate 18 January 2014

Email
Facebook
Twitter
Comment234

Uncategorized
General Debate

Comments (234)

Login to comment or vote

Reid

stephie’s another Kea, doesn’t understand his subjects, thinks, nay is convinced he does, isn’t prepared to listen to alternatives. Not worth engaging with. Just like Kea.
4 3
Log in to Reply
Report
January 18, 2014 9:18pm
Rowan

Very true Reid

Nosty you are making far to much sense and your post contains far to much truth for Fanny and Stephieboy.
3 5
Log in to Reply
Report
January 18, 2014 9:23pm
Judith

@stephieboy (318 comments) says:
January 18th, 2014 at 8:49 pm

You clearly have some sort of comprehension problem. The question was regarding the police’s list of things wrong with the report – for which you think is perfect. I provided you with an example which shows that the list is not perfect, so rather than admit you’re wrong, you instead go off on some other tangent, I suppose trying to detract people from the fact that you don’t know what the hell you’re talking about.

I didn’t say Counterspin had done anything criminal, but I did infer that maybe one might consider certain acts of defamation could be considered criminal if they were proved to have been done with intent to cause harm – that of course might be something for future consideration, because as you digressed (in your attempt to pull the attention away from the fact you are ignorant to facts in the Bain case and Binnie report) the current defamation case is not a criminal one.

Now please, instead of going for the FW title of the week, why don’t you run along and play with Kenty – unless of course he’s too busy playing with himself.

PS I remember who used to end their posts with ‘I rest my case’ ! 😉
2 5
Log in to Reply
Report
January 18, 2014 9:29pm
stephieboy

I stand corrected . A decision has apparently been made not to appeal the decline in application for the privileged emails . But the Judicial review itself will possibly be pursued.
Updates please.?

http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/auckland/news/nbpol/1926184885-collins-seems-satisfied-with-bain-ruling

This could take a very long time to resolve as any decision to grant comp is in essence a political one of a discretionary kind and not a judicial one.
Rowan are you you arguing now that the police did not give 65 Every St back to the Executors of the estate.?
The basis of your claim with links and sources please .?
Now for the rest of the claims Binnie got wrong re police.?
Playing with Kenty.?Oh judith you are a childish prat , now aren’t you just .?
Is that the sum total of your reasoning powers .?
2 2
Log in to Reply
Report
January 18, 2014 9:42pm
wreck1080

“She had been sentenced to three years and nine months in jail in 2009 after admitting that she violently shook her four-month-old son in “a moment of madness,” leaving him permanently brain-damaged.
”

So, what does she do after she gets released from jail…

“The charges followed a dramatic incident on August 15, 2012, when Albert drove her car into her uncle on Wakefield Quay in Nelson, crushing him against a pole and severing his right leg.”

This piece of trash needs to be put down IMHO.
3 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 18, 2014 9:47pm
Rowan

“Rowan are you you arguing now that the police did not give 65 Every St back to the Executors of the estate.?”

Thats not what I said dimwit, and I am under no obligation to repost anything just for your benefit. You are not that important to me.
1 4
Log in to Reply
Report
January 18, 2014 9:57pm
F E Smith

kowtow,

nope, didn’t read it. I am, however, well aware of the history of the uprising, war for independence, and the civil war that followed the ratification of the treaty.

I am not going to agree with you. There was no viable constitutional option available to the Irish at the time, the First World War having curtailed the implementation of Asquith’s bill to provide it. The moment Lloyd George came to power there was little chance of it being implemented as passed, indeed the War for Independence was really the only thing that forced his hand, as he was busy playing both sides against each other. Edward Carson and James Craig were firmly set against it and their influence in the North was enormous. Indeed, I note that the Ulster Volunteers had armed themselves even before the IRB/IV did.

I haven’t watched the video, but I might later. I would just point out that the good professor is resident at Trinity College, Dublin, a firmly Protestant and Unionist college during the Uprising and War for Independence, and still very much orientated that way even today. Don’t get me wrong, I like Trinity a lot and have spent many a happy hour there with friends enjoying the atmosphere and the history that pervades the place. The unionist viewpoint is still very strong at Trinity, however, as evidenced by the large numbers of Northern Irish who attend. I don’t pretend it is as strong as it used to be, but it is still there.

I am not blind to the atrocities of the time, but unlike you I don’t put the entire blame on the IRB.
1 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 18, 2014 10:08pm
Nostalgia-NZ

Little point in ‘standing’ corrected stephieboy if following with something else which is also wrong. But forgetting about the derivatives for now, would you explain how the burning of the house is material to Robin having blood smears on his palms and his dna inside the barrel. That’s really what the case is about, the person who had blood on their palms.
2 3
Log in to Reply
Report
January 18, 2014 10:10pm
stephieboy

Rowan am now glad you now accept the police got it right and Binnie wrong re the burning of the house as per police response,

Para 57 Police author/sed the burning down of the house

Police were in no position to authorise anything regarding the house- it had been handed back to the Trustees.

Nostalgia, just pointing our the numerous egregious errors and incorrect assumptions Binnie made about the police investigation.
The alleged blood smears on Robin’s hands were actually small and insignificant. if they were copious then it could not explain why he did not leave identifiable fingerprints like David and Stephen did.Or did he wipe the gun down before shooting himself.?
I understand the blood was actually at the tip of the barrel.
Was it ever tested for DNA.?
Yes or No.?
Do note also that Philip Boyce agreed under cross examination that a close contact shot could not rule out homicide .
5 3
Log in to Reply
Report
January 18, 2014 10:26pm
Kea

Reid (14,701 comments) says:
January 18th, 2014 at 9:18 pm
stephie’s another Kea, doesn’t understand his subjects, thinks, nay is convinced he does, isn’t prepared to listen to alternatives. Not worth engaging with. Just like Kea.

Another words you have nothing to refute my views, so you launch personal attacks.

Try doing the decent thing for once Reid. There is no god to forgive your bullshit.
5 4
Log in to Reply
Report
January 18, 2014 10:39pm
Nostalgia-NZ

A mishmash of nothing unfortunately stephieboy.

The police prematurely ‘releasing’ the house to be ‘burnt’ is neither the fault of the family or David.

‘Small and insignificant’ smears on blood on palms of a suspected killer, really? Smears are never ‘copious,’ they show that Robin had blood on his palms that didn’t get there from praying, but rather from handling something bloody, a bloody fight – you get the picture. Do you know what a laboratory smear is for example? Do you think it is a flood of some sort? How did the get there? What bloody deeds was Robin up to that morning to get ‘blood wash’ on his palms.

You may ‘understand’ that blood was in the tip of the barrel. Even if that was true it had already needed to travel the length of the silencer to get there. The dna could only have arrived there from the last shot, a insurmountable problem for you I fear. Robin leaned his head against the rifle and shot himself, resulting in his brain matter being sucked deep down inside the barrel. But I guess you already know that. Of course a close contact shot cannot not rule out homicide but the absence of ‘shielding’ in the blood spatter does. Who is feeding you this nonsense? Don’t you consider what you are writing, frankly, it’s desperate.
3 5
Log in to Reply
Report
January 18, 2014 10:42pm
Kea

stephieboy, yes indeed. I don’t mind the personal attacks, as it adds a bit of spice to things. But some sort of attempt to address the point should be included.
0 1
Log in to Reply
Report
January 18, 2014 10:47pm
Kea

Robin leaned his head against the rifle and shot himself, resulting in his brain matter being sucked deep down inside the barrel.

So the blood was “sucked” into the gun, against the exiting blast of expanding gas ?

Wow LOL 🙂

As someone who is interested in firearms, I would love to hear you explain that one in more detail…
5 3
Log in to Reply
Report
January 18, 2014 10:54pm
Nostalgia-NZ

It’s creates a vacuum kea, like inside your head.
4 6
Log in to Reply
Report
January 18, 2014 10:58pm
Rowan

Nosty lets just have a look at what Stephie and CS cannot explain in the Bain case
1. How Robin was shot by anyone other than himself.
2. Robins death scene in any meaingful way consistent with ‘murder’ whatsoever
3. The blood and bruising on Robins hands.
4. How blood in the barrel of a rifle can stay there after the weapon has been fired subsequently.
5. Robins bloody footprints in the murder scene.
6. Kim Jones ‘bloody’ fingerprint ‘evidence’.
7. The gurgling by Laniet.
8. Robins blood on the green towel in the laundry.
9. The marks on his fingers consistent with the magazine and gunpowder residue.
10. Pretty much anything at all relating to the murder-suicide at Every Street

Thats the top 10 that comes to my mind, in contrast the only thing the defence cannot explain is the rational behind what Robin was thinking i.e. the ‘why’ questions which can never be satisfactorily answered.
3 5
Log in to Reply
Report
January 18, 2014 11:02pm
stephieboy

Oh Nostalgia do give up will you.!
Oh I see the police now “prematurely ” released the the house to the trustees.That’s a highly novel approach one which you can onviously document.
But the blood spots and flecks were in fact small and insignificant as per Detective Lodges testimony ,

a smear of blood on heal of thumb inside left hand
a smear of blood on left little finger
no blood on right hand
a splash of blood on nail of second right finger
a spot of blood on outside of left thunb
scrapings from under Robins fingernails containing possible blood, were also noted by Mr. Hentschel but were to small a sample for blood group analysis

Handling something bloody ,? Purely speculative like the alleged blood wash and inconsistent with the above.
And why would Robin need to wash his hands if committing murder/ suicide.?
Oh I see the old going to meet his maker canard concocted by the Defence at the retrial.?
Again was the blood at tip tip of the barrel analyzed for DNA.?
Yes or no,?
Where did this so called ” shielding ” come from.?
Manlove, Lloyd .? Did Boyce raise this to preclude homicide under cross examination.?
If not, why not.?
5 3
Log in to Reply
Report
January 18, 2014 11:05pm
Nostalgia-NZ

Fortunately Rowan, we can ask Kea what Robin was thinking – once of course, he gets that vacuum out of his head.
2 5
Log in to Reply
Report
January 18, 2014 11:06pm
Nostalgia-NZ

Did you know stephieboy that the police ‘released’ the house to be burnt down, because they were concerned it might be burnt down. You would understand that.
2 5
Log in to Reply
Report
January 18, 2014 11:10pm
Rowan

Stephie
If you are going to attempt to do what the crown couldn’t and explain Robins death meaingfully, then you are going to need to be specific in trying to refute Boyce and Manloves evidence, and you are going to need to do a hell of a lot better than that comedy cartoon by Marzuka and stupid CS arguments such as ‘the judge allowed Karam to assist Boyce in his demonstration’ and ‘defence needed headgear to show how easy it was’. That is laughable. If there is a second report maybe you and he could explain your fictitious scenarios to the reviewer. They could do with the laugh.
2 5
Log in to Reply
Report
January 18, 2014 11:14pm
stephieboy

Rowan your lot are the desperate ones as the compo claim remains ever elusive and ever unlikely .
The blood and bruising on Robin’s hands.?
As outlined the amount blood on his hands was minuscule and the bruising to his right hand was insignificant .
The blood at the tip of the barrel was never analyzed and there is nothing to say it could not remain there despite subsequent firing.
Robin’s bloody foot prints at the crime scene. ? Highly contentious and debatable.
Kim Jones did not mislead anyone. Thats a fiction invented by the probainers to explain away the fact he had the advantage of examining David’s pristine prints the following day after the murders . Lloyd and others did not.
Laniet’s gurgling .? The defense went to great lengths to try and explain this one away.
Robin’s blood on the green towel.? David’s blood was found on his duvet cover. Your point .?
The marks consistent with gunpowder residue.? Thar is again a highly contentious point originated by a person who incorrectly claimed he had an unbiased interest in the case.
The whys of Robin’s thinking and state of mind .
Well maybe he ,in fact, is innocent after all. !
5 3
Log in to Reply
Report
January 18, 2014 11:29pm
Nostalgia-NZ

You’re getting pretty funny now stephieboy. Can you explain where the tip of the barrel was in context of the silencer, that might help you calm down. Then perhaps you could have a lol with Sister Kea about dna arriving in the barrel. That would be fun.
2 5
Log in to Reply
Report
January 18, 2014 11:36pm
stephieboy

Rowan (1,458 comments) says:
January 18th, 2014 at 11:14 pm
But the real joke is that Boyce did concede that a close contact shot as per his demo could not preclude homicide.
And, of course ,Robin choosing shoot himself in the most awkward way possible.!
Mazuraka. ?You explain then how Robin’s body got to be over by the Bean bag.?
I never thought a .22 could have such recoil and force like say a 308 or shot gun.
And the evidence he actually had put his foot on that chair. ? Shoe marks, blood etc.??
4 2
Log in to Reply
Report
January 18, 2014 11:44pm
stephieboy

Nostalgia are now saying there was no blood at either at the tip of the silencer or inside it.?
3 1
Log in to Reply
Report
January 18, 2014 11:46pm
Nostalgia-NZ

errh, no. Robin’s blood was through the silencer and deep inside the barrel as the result of his suicide.
2 3
Log in to Reply
Report
January 18, 2014 11:49pm
Kea

The question referred to how blood was sucked into a gun barrel while hot expanding gas and a projectile exited it at around 1000 fps.

The DB supporters reply: ‘It’s creates a vacuum kea, like inside your head.’

It pretty much sums up the level of thinking you see with DB supporters. I am not interested in DB. I just want to know about this suction effect. I have shot many thousands of rounds in a variety of firearms. I have read far more than most about the physics of it all. Yet I have never heard of this.

I am not convinced by Nostalgia’s explanation.
8 4
Log in to Reply
Report
January 18, 2014 11:59pm
Nostalgia-NZ

Well, of course you are Kea and you have no explanation to the contrary.
2 6
Log in to Reply
Report
January 19, 2014 12:06am
lazza

Well Yes Kea … you are! THE (in this case, and in part my) “point”.

General Debate is “General” and the key topic/message (leave out the gratuitous abuse both from Kea and his opponents) is worthy of a thorough airing.

I applaud the warning from “Slim Dave” … that Kea is getting close to an abusive and a generally well understood “line.” But DPF blessim, for the moment, in the interests of the importance of the topic allows the debate to roll on. Goodonyuh.

The really worthwhile “point” of Kea’s tirades, though admittedly well masked with vitriol or worse, is that the debate about “Who is at Fault?” in domestic violence cases should! be widely debated. Here’s my penny’sworth.

1. I generally concede that the majority (I almost said “vast”) are perpetrated by men …

2. In all matters of human affairs there are always two sides to the arguments/conflicts that lead to the violence bit …

3. It is the role played in the exacerbation-excalation of these issues leading to violence of the “other” party that is hardly ever acknowledged or allowed for (notice I say “other” party who could be of either! sex).

4. It is however the standoff between the obvious opinionated position- takers (Kea for the males V Feminists for the women) who tend to dominate the debate.

4. “F Off “I say to”both” Kea and the Fem’s … but let’s not please leave out the issue of feminine culpability (BTW NOTHING! to do with the facts of the Dunedin killings please note) … and thereby allow a proper (General) and reasoned debate on the subject to proceed.

5. And what do I think? Well men deservedly get most of the blame .. the stats on this do not lie. It is difficult from the sidelines not to observe that there is a bias of process here … where violence of a male and the woman’s! role in these situations is rarely even mentioned let alone accounted for.

6. Result: “NOT fair” … and hardly surprising really when horrible consequnces sometimes follow as these are often motivated (it is difficult not to conclude ) due to the perceived/actual unfairness to a male in (usually) custody disputes.

So Go Figger! that is, for situations relating to a “balanced” assessment …THINK … of the roles that BOTH partners have played in a breakdown are not being “fairly” weighed … OK?
3 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 19, 2014 8:52am
Rowan

Stephie
Your pathetic attempts to explain anything are as usual, laughable and 0.00000% convincing.
Robin did not choose ‘the most awkward way possible’ that is a lie used by JFRB, Dr Dempster agreed there was no required contortions, the temple is the most common place for suicide wounds and a close contact wound is around 95% more likely to be suicide, hence you have a long way to go to explain this.

“You explain then how Robin’s body got to be over by the Bean bag.?”

Depends entirely on the final position he was in i.e. how close to the chair, you idiots (with no measurements) try to say he ‘must’ have been blasted 3+ metres, ridiculous.

“And the evidence he actually had put his foot on that chair. ? Shoe marks, blood etc.??”

It is one scenario used by Boyce, there were several.

As usual Stephieboy, you resort to “you explain”, when asked questions that you obviously have no answer to.

“Kim Jones did not mislead anyone”

Yeah right , nice one, Stephie does blood fluoresce under a polilight? Kim Jones seems to think it does and told the 1995 jury it did! In 2009 he admitted that it didn’t, therefore what he told the 1995 jury was wrong, intentionally or otherwise. Therefore the jury was misled, dunce. Also he told the retrial jury that fingerprint ridge definition is enhanced under pressure. Is this true, try it by making a fingerprint on something, make two and in the second one really press down hard applying significant pressure, which print has better ridge detail? Its not hard to work out the answer even for an arrogant dunce like yourself.

“Well maybe he ,in fact, is innocent after all.”

Yes and maybe pigs really can fly, its obvious to around 70% of the population that he isn’t, the others are just stupid or in denial.
2 3
Log in to Reply
Report
January 19, 2014 10:38am
nickb

Sheesh, the Bainiacs are out in force.

I wouldn’t bother Kea, although I admire your tenacity. The Bainiacs tend to bog you down in completely irrelevant minutiae, whilst smokescreening the debate with abuse when you bring up the numerous smoking guns (if you’ll pardon the pun) like David Bain’s 25 minute delay in calling 111 whilst he washed his bloody clothes…LMAO
4 3
Log in to Reply
Report
January 19, 2014 11:01am
Nostalgia-NZ

You always make that claim nickb but never produce the proof. So what’s irrelevant about the blood smears on your idol’s hands. As has been said before it’s a test of idiocy, you excel.
1 5
Log in to Reply
Report
January 19, 2014 4:30pm
corrigenda

You must remember that when it comes to domestic violence, for every bastard, there is a toxic woman, who when the chips are down, will smile sweetly at some elderly judge who can’t take his eyes off her boobs, and who will give her everything she asks for, despite ample documented evidence to the contrary!!!
2 1
Log in to Reply
Report
January 19, 2014 7:19pm
Manolo

David Bain is innocent and did not kill anyone. It’s all a conspiracy, a campaign against this saintly man jointly organised by the FSB (former KGB) and CIA.

David is pure, as his acolytes Judith and Rowan can confirm. Whiter than blood red colour.
4 1
Log in to Reply
Report
January 19, 2014 7:26pm
Kea

corrigenda, one of the better informed comments today.
1 1
Log in to Reply
Report
January 19, 2014 7:41pm
Kea

nickb, my only interest is in the suction of muzzle blasts. 😉
0 1
Log in to Reply
Report
January 19, 2014 7:54pm

More comments:

‹
1
2
3

Add a Comment Cancel reply

Login to comment or vote

« The Finlayson style guide

A sad case »

Donations

You can now donate to Kiwiblog

Exclusive content from DPF on Patreon

Become a Patron!

Highlights

The Kiwis are fleeing
Inflation by term
Houston we have a problem
Our immunisation disaster

Never miss a post

Email Address

Links

Open mike 17/04/2024
The Standard
A wonderful bit of prose
Utopia
Reader mailbag: really long tunnels edition
Offsetting Behaviour
Climate Change: Criminal ecocide
No Right Turn
Is the state coming for churches?
Bob McCoskrie's McBlog
UN 'integrity'
Not PC
Minor Blog Change Announcement
No Minister
Howling at the Moon
Point of Order
Word of the day
Hompaddock
The Working Group with Arena Williams, Max Harris and Damien Grant
The Daily Blog
THE DEATH OF DEMOCRACY
No Punches Pulled (Bob Jones)
Super Rugby Predictions for Week 9
Stats Chat
Coalition Promises
NZCPR
Arguing about a moot point.
Kiwipolitico
Tougher than that
Croaking Cassandra
ABs stripped of 2011 title after try disallowed
Imperator Fish
Legal Beagle: Election '23: The Special Votes
Public Address
Making this movie might have been a mistake
Liam Hehir
Why I am retiring from political blogging
Kiwi FireWalker
Angie Warren-Clark: Meet the Newbies
Dan Moskovitz