David Bain vs The Crown - game over

[scissorhands]

New evidence shown on TV3 3rd Degree tonight, David Bain is innocent

give David Bain some money now

[oneofsix]

:calm: nearly missed that, thanks. However I will judge for myself if I think it is game over, whereas the MP responsible wont believe a word of it.

[scumdog]

Maybe...

The marks on Robin Bains hand were made how many hours before he died????
One week?
One day?
Half and hour?

[98tls]

New evidence shown on TV3 #rd Degree tonight, David Bain is innocent

give David Bain some money now

New Tui ad?

[F5 Dave]

Didn't see it

so you come home, oh no my family has been gruesomely murdered. Best I put some clothes in the washing. Nah, that screwed it for me.

[scissorhands]

Maybe...

The marks on Robin Bains hand were made how many hours before he died????
One week?
One day?
Half and hour?

The marks rub off quite quickly with normal hand use or washing
c'mon give it up
continual denial will produce nothing good from now on
admission of fault is a sign of good character I'm told:whistle:

[oneofsix]

Didn't see it

so you come home, oh no my family has been gruesomely murdered. Best I put some clothes in the washing. Nah, that screwed it for me.

TV3 replay channel starts at 9:30. Still on.

Yeah the family were a bit strange but so is what people do in trauma situations.

[oneofsix]

The marks rub off quite quickly with normal hand use or washing
c'mon give it up
continual denial will produce nothing good from now on
admission of fault is a sign of good character I'm told:whistle:

:Police: have never admitted that Alan Arthur Thomas was stitched up or even not guilty. At least in this case there is no evidence of planted evidence - yet.

[BigAl]

What I would like to know is how the police missed the marks on Robin Bains thumb clearly made from loading the magazine as the program proved.

Another major cock up by the police who are clearly only competent at planting evidence (Hutton)
And stuffing up search warrants (dot com).

Shit makes any PC Plod on the telly look like brain scientists compared to our plod!

[Wingnut]

Robin Bain Mag Stain = Poor Policing or deliberately ignored? It appears just too obvious when reviewing the photos... Scary that this has been missed!

[scumdog]

The marks rub off quite quickly with normal hand use or washing
c'mon give it up
continual denial will produce nothing good from now on
admission of fault is a sign of good character I'm told:whistle:

I would need to look again - but they looked like physical scratches rather than dirty marks from touching the mag lips.

[granstar]

Hmmm.. know an ex cop around at the time, indicates with no elaboration a maybe.

[BigAl]

I would need to look again - but they looked like physical scratches rather than dirty marks from touching the mag lips.

Suggest you actually watch the program. Vernier measurement was exactly the same width as the mag and parallel.

Same position as loading marks and not cuts when image blown up.

[Maha]

To believe David Bain is innocent, you have to believe that Robin shot himself, which to my knowledge thus far, he did not.

[HenryDorsetCase]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/opinion/2518912/Plenty-of-doubt-in-Bain-jurys-verdict


IF not David, then who?

[BoristheBiter]

What I would like to know is how the police missed the marks on Robin Bains thumb clearly made from loading the magazine as the program proved.

Another major cock up by the police who are clearly only competent at planting evidence (Hutton)
And stuffing up search warrants (dot com).

Shit makes any PC Plod on the telly look like brain scientists compared to our plod!

I have loaded thousands of rounds in numerous different weapons and never ended up with marks on my thumb.

[oneofsix]

To believe David Bain is innocent, you have to believe that Robin shot himself, which to my knowledge thus far, he did not.

How do you know he didn't?

Why only the two choices? Because those are the two choices the prosecution pushed? What about the extended family that were likely embarrassed by David's family AND stood to claim all the money if they could frame David, quite a nice nest egg as David's family had put aside enough to build a new house and there was the sale of the property. too many Aggie novels :crazy:

[oldrider]

Looks more like the marks I get on my hands from gardening and such too little too late for any pay out.

Beyond all reasonable doubt works both ways I reckon. :yes:

[oneofsix]

I have loaded thousands of rounds in numerous different weapons and never ended up with marks on my thumb.

but not that one? or did you do it? :laugh:

Pity the experts on the programme and those that used the actual rifle don't agree with you, but then again we know you are special. :corn:

[Goblin]

Does anyone else have TV3 glitching out with no sound? Missed half of the 3rd Degree because of it.

[BigAl]

Does anyone else have TV3 glitching out with no sound? Missed half of the 3rd Degree because of it.

The GCSB are at work but are too late, lol.

[JimO]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/opinion/2518912/Plenty-of-doubt-in-Bain-jurys-verdict


IF not David, then who?
the one armed man

[scumdog]

the one armed man

On the grassy knoll...;)

[BoristheBiter]

but not that one? or did you do it? :laugh:

Pity the experts on the programme and those that used the actual rifle don't agree with you, but then again we know you are special. :corn:

Experts? what some guy that has guns or the one using verniers on a photo.

[Laava]

Fuck me! I just checked my thumbs...and...well...I think it might have been me!

[BigAl]

Fuck me! I just checked my thumbs...and...well...I think it might have been me!

Nice pussy!

[Laava]

Nice pussy!

Oops! Forgot to pull my skirt down!

[oneofsix]

Experts? what some guy that has guns or the one using verniers on a photo.

Which reminds me, supper time, think I will get a bite to eat.

[scumdog]

Fuck me! I just checked my thumbs...and...well...I think it might have been me!

You've got hairy palms!!

[pete376403]

Does anyone else have TV3 glitching out with no sound? Missed half of the 3rd Degree because of it.
Either that or the tinkly "music" whenever I wanted to hear the narration.

[scissorhands]

I have loaded thousands of rounds in numerous different weapons and never ended up with marks on my thumb.

Th 'experts' were in actuality gun smiths and top shooters. As well the journalist loaded a similar magazine and all agreed on the mag marks.

The 3rd degree camera clearly showed mag marks after reload on similar .22 rifles used in the murder

[Maha]

How do you know he didn't?

Why only the two choices? Because those are the two choices the prosecution pushed? What about the extended family that were likely embarrassed by David's family AND stood to claim all the money if they could frame David, quite a nice nest egg as David's family had put aside enough to build a new house and there was the sale of the property. too many Aggie novels :crazy:

I don't know if he did or did not..but David was found not guilty of killing Robin suggesting only, that he shot himself?
Last night 3rd degree programme showed compelling evidence that Robin did in fact, fire the rifle that was used to kill his family.

Were the FBI in NZ at the time?. maybe there is slight chance that the photo's tell a different story than what actually happened?

[BoristheBiter]

Th 'experts' were in actuality gun smiths and top shooters. As well the journalist loaded a similar magazine and all agreed on the mag marks.

The 3rd degree camera clearly showed mag marks after reload on similar .22 rifles used in the murder

The experts, don't make me laugh, they are just people with opinion just like here, none of it would stand up in court as you would find just as many saying it means nothing.


I don't know if he did or did not..but David was found not guilty of killing Robin suggesting only, that he shot himself?
Last night 3rd degree programme showed compelling evidence that Robin did in fact, fire the rifle that was used to kill his family.

Were the FBI in NZ at the time?. maybe there is slight chance that the photo's tell a different story than what actually happened?

And Davids fingerprints where all over the gun, so that must mean he fired the gun. Maybe it was a murder suicide packed.

[Maha]

The experts, don't make me laugh, they are just people with opinion just like here, none of it would stand up in court as you would find just as many saying it means nothing.



And Davids fingerprints where all over the gun, so that must mean he fired the gun. Maybe it was a murder suicide packed.

I don't think there was ever any doubt that David (had at some stage) held the rifle. The same could be said about your bike, your fingerprints would be found on it somewhere? does that mean if it was used as a get away vehicle in a robbery for instance, you were the rider?

[oneofsix]

The experts, don't make me laugh, they are just people with opinion just like here, none of it would stand up in court as you would find just as many saying it means nothing.

Are you still fishing with that same tied old bait? :rofl: Just because you know nothing.



And Davids fingerprints where all over the gun, so that must mean he fired the gun. Maybe it was a murder suicide packed.
Well as it was his gun yeah I guess you are right for once, he did fire it at some time. Now if memory serves I think that was a day or two before whilst rabbit hunting. Still leaves reasonable doubt.

Just another case of out :Police: being over trained to hand out traffic tickets but unable to do their real job and gather evidence according to their own book. If the :Police: had bagged Robin's hands, if they had kept the carpet, if they had used a real watch instead of a fashion piece, if they had listened to the nurse (well they probably did but were trying to see if there was a traffic offence in what she said as she was driving when she saw David), if then there would have been evidence but again they failed.

Now there is a bait trail for you.

[BoristheBiter]

I don't think there was ever any doubt that David (had at some stage) held the rifle. The same could be said about your bike, your fingerprints would be found on it somewhere? does that mean if it was used as a get away vehicle in a robbery for instance, you were the rider?

So was Robin shooting with him? did he get these marks then? this just opens more questions and puts more doubt into the public arena so TPTB will give him compensation so his legal team can get paid.


Are you still fishing with that same tied old bait? :rofl: Just because you know nothing.



Well as it was his gun yeah I guess you are right for once, he did fire it at some time. Now if memory serves I think that was a day or two before whilst rabbit hunting. Still leaves reasonable doubt.

Just another case of out :Police: being over trained to hand out traffic tickets but unable to do their real job and gather evidence according to their own book. If the :Police: had bagged Robin's hands, if they had kept the carpet, if they had used a real watch instead of a fashion piece, if they had listened to the nurse (well they probably did but were trying to see if there was a traffic offence in what she said as she was driving when she saw David), if then there would have been evidence but again they failed.

Now there is a bait trail for you.


That's a worse attempt than mine.

[oneofsix]

So was Robin shooting with him? did he get these marks then? this just opens more questions and puts more doubt into the public arena so TPTB will give him compensation so his legal team can get paid.




That's a worse attempt than mine.

Nah, mine much better because it is based on established facts that do raise questions. Your attempts, including this, have already been answered in the programme.

[MisterD]

The biggest pile of far-fetched bollocks I've heard in all my born days.

David Bain is a murderer and should be happy he got away with it.

[oneofsix]

The biggest pile of far-fetched bollocks I've heard in all my born days.

David Bain is a murderer and should be happy he got away with it.

Entrenched view with no argument given. Judith Collins would be pleased with you. :lol:

[MisterD]

Entrenched view with no argument given. Judith Collins would be pleased with you. :lol:

Prior to last night we had screeds of circumstantial evidence pointing to David as the killer, and the Karamalites had a bunch of vague smoke about Robin's possible motives and incredibly spurious explanations for the evidence against David.

Now, the Karamalites have one (count it!) one! piece of circumstantial evidence against Robin. Chuck it on the Robin side of the scales, and they don't move a nanometer.

David did it.

[meteor]

Did anyone ever expect the journo to present a balanced unbiased story? How naive.
I've got a novel idea, why not let the jury hear (and the press report) ALL the evidence... Any of the keyboard experts know how much was excluded? I don't.
And remembering this is real life and not CSI with CCTV and Horatio isn't interviewing for admissions, there will be gaps BUT despite all the legal protections the defence could claim, was it still proven beyond a REASONABLE doubt...

This was posted elsewhere from the few facts the press reported... make up your own mind

It was a lucky guess when David Bain told 111 ambulance officer they are all dead, despite later saying he only saw two bodies

Again a lucky guess hen DB told police officer they are all dead

The 25 minute gap between DB finding his family dead and calling 111 is in no way connected with trying to wash clothes and removed blood.

The bruise on David’s head and scratches on his chest and graze on his knee – none of which he could explain, were just a coincidence

The lens from his glasses found in Stephen’s room happened weeks ago and he never noticed OR someone else had borrowed the glasses

The lack of fresh injuries on Robin despite the massive struggle with Stephen is just the product of healthy living

David’s finger prints on gun are from a previous time

David telling a friend he had premonition something bad was going to happen was a genuine psychic experience

Stephen’s blood on David’s clothing was nothing to do with the struggle – OR someone else borrowed his clothes

Robin managed to execute his family on a full bladder

The lock and key to the rifle being found in David’s room is not relevant as they were obviously placed there

Robin decided to wash David’s green jersey to remove blood and the fibres from jersey found under Steven’s finger nails

David’s bloody palm print on the washing machine was from him checking the bodies

The Ambulance officer was wrong when he said in his opinion Bain was pretending to have a fit

Robin Bain would logically wear gloves to prevent fingerprints despite it being a murder-suicide

That Robin Bain would type a message on a computer for David telling him he is the only one who deserves to live, instead of writing a note. A hand written note incidentally would have cleared David.

Also that having just shot his family, and knowing David was due home, that Robin would wait 44 seconds for the computer to boot up to leave a message

Robin would decide David deserved to live, but go out of his way to frame him for murder

Robin Bain placed fibres from Davids jersey under Stephen’s finger nails

Robin Bain would shoot himself with a gun in the most awkward way possible?

That Robin Bain changed jerseys after he had killed his family and in particular Stephen Bain, washed the jersey, hung it on the line and then change into a brown jersey before killing himself?

That there is a logical reason that David Bain can not account for the injuries on his face, the bruise or the scraped knee, yet knows he did not have them during his paper run.

That Robin Bain put blood on the inside of David’s duvet and on his light switch

That there is an innocent explanation for why David says he put on washing before he discovered the bodies, yet there is a blood print on the washing machine.

That Laniet was being paranoid when she told friends she was scared of David

That the “family meeting” David called the previous night and insisted everyone attended was not a way to make sure everyone would be at home to kill.

That Robin Bain would wear a hat while shooting himself in the head.

That even though David told a relative he hated his father, his father did not know this and deliberately decided David was the only one who deserved to live

That David either imagined hearing Laniet gurgling or she gurgled 20 minutes after death

That Laniet allegations of incent with Robin was true, as was her claims she had given birth three times by the age of 12 and a half.

That Robin Bain managed to kill four family members without a single trace of his blood, skin, or DNA being left at the scene.

That it is a coincidence that on the morning of the murders Bain took his dog onto a property, ensuring he would be noticed to give him an alibi.

That the magazine found balanced on an edge next to Robin was not placed there by David but fell onto its edge from Robin’s arms.

That a sickly Robin Bain managed to overpower his teenaged son who put up a furious fight

That Robin Bain went and got the newspaper from outside, despite planning to shoot himself


David bain has been found not guilty as a result of a concerted effort to create doubt in the mind of the public and jurors. Oh yeah the jurors, none of whom will not have heard of the case prior to the trial. yeah sure the evidence from back then was a little obscure, but why the fuck would the Dad have done the whole family and left Little Davey alive, there is no way he would have, Father and Son loathed each other, and David would have been the first one to have got a bullet, but as he didn't then it proves to me that Dad was the first one that got the bullet and then David lost it completely he was aware the family saw what he had done, he panicked and fried the lot of them, if only one of them had survived.

Then that lone family member, could have cast the stone at David and shown im for the cold caculating murderer he is.

He is the guiltiest fucker I have ever seen, I have followed the case closely, Defence solicitors always glorify with making the evidence look abit shabby and then the judge says it has to go beyond reasonable doubt. The defence solicitors are as fucking guilty as those who they represent.

Having been a cop in England for 14 years, I wouldnt trust a defence solicitor as far as I could throw him, they have got new defence solicitors in on this case not the old ones, but they get the old cops in that are shaky on their memory, its all unfair.

Defence Solicitors are a law to themselves and got folk off for the most horrendous things, as they have cruel mischievious minds and are borne from the same mould as these murdering evil fuckers. They know the truth and twist it to get the bad guys off. You can thank them for these horrible folk walking the earth again....a lot of them go onto reoffend too.

Sorry if that sounds harsh, but how the hell can Bain live with himself, and too all those Defence solicitors how the fuck can you sleep at night, knowing that you are defending someone who has done a henious crime.

A leopard will never change his spots and all this rehabilitation bollocks, never works crims have evil and calculating minds, they do wrong knowingly. They do not deserve to walk the earth with good mortals..........

AND...

Hmm there is one other point here. If David is innocent why did he not take the stand and let the jury see the "whites of his eyes". I know he doesn't have to but I would love to see him answer the following simple questions:

1. When you got home you said you saw your mother and father dead and could hear Laniet "gurgling". So why wait 20-25 minutes before calling 111?
2. When you did call 111, why did you say "they're all dead" when you said later that you only saw your mother and father?
3. Bearing in mind the above, how did you get your brother's blood on the back of your shirt?
4. Why did you turn the washing machine on before dialling 111?

I don't believe that this was a case of multiple murderers. In this case, David would have the perfect self defence case... so why not just simply tell police what happened?

Above all else, you have to remember that the jury can only make an interpretation on the evidence put to it. that evidence is what is left after being picked over, argued about and excluded. The jury will not get ALL the evidence.
also, when a jury acquits a person... that is a finding that the jury could not find the accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt on the evidence they were 'allowed' to see. Acquital is not a finding of innocence.

[oneofsix]

Prior to last night we had screeds of circumstantial evidence pointing to David as the killer, and the Karamalites had a bunch of vague smoke about Robin's possible motives and incredibly spurious explanations for the evidence against David.

Now, the Karamalites have one (count it!) one! piece of circumstantial evidence against Robin. Chuck it on the Robin side of the scales, and they don't move a nanometer.

David did it.

Actually your count is a bit screwed on the Robin side, he was picked as the alternative in the beginning because of the weight of circumstantial evidence against him. The only real in count difference was David was alive. A third party was never looked into and AFAIK never totally ruled out, just never investigated.

[Banditbandit]

I would need to look again - but they looked like physical scratches rather than dirty marks from touching the mag lips.

See .. like I suspect many Kiwi's did - I pulled out my .22 mag and reloaded it .. guess what ??? There were the marks on me - exactly as was described ... ansd exactly as in the photos shown ...

These marks disappeared as soon as I sat down and touched the arms on my chair ...


I have loaded thousands of rounds in numerous different weapons and never ended up with marks on my thumb.

Me too ... but then I usually load my magazines in a different way to that shown on the programme - as soon as I used the method the gun smiths and other firearms users did then I got the marks ... and these gun smiths and firearms users say this is a normal way they load ...

David has been proven innocent ...

[Naki Rat]

Looks more like the marks I get on my hands from gardening and such too little too late for any pay out.

Beyond all reasonable doubt works both ways I reckon. :yes:That's not the way innocent until proven guilty works and is a dangerous path to go down :no:

[BigAl]

The main point of this thread is that here is real important, possibly case breaking evidence, that the police investigators missed and it required a member of the public to identify and investigate.

Incompentance or what?

[Banditbandit]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/opinion/2518912/Plenty-of-doubt-in-Bain-jurys-verdict


IF not David, then who?


the one armed man



On the grassy knoll...;)

With explosives under the cover of an airplane attack ...

[Banditbandit]

Th 'experts' were in actuality gun smiths and top shooters. As well the journalist loaded a similar magazine and all agreed on the mag marks.

The 3rd degree camera clearly showed mag marks after reload on similar .22 rifles used in the murder

As well as two forensic scientists - one used regularly by the police ...

[Naki Rat]

For those that missed it, a link to the 3rd Degree program (http://www.tv3.co.nz/tabid/3692/MCat/3304/Default.aspx).

[Banditbandit]

The experts, don't make me laugh, they are just people with opinion just like here, none of it would stand up in court as you would find just as many saying it means nothing.

Yes .. this evidence would stand up in court .. and there is a good chance it wil be tested that way as Crusher Collins may well maintain her stance and it will take a court case to find david Innocent.




And Davids fingerprints where all over the gun, so that must mean he fired the gun. Maybe it was a murder suicide packed.

Nine sets of fingerprints were found on the gun ... not one match was found to meet evidential standards ... Robin's and David's prints were probably on the gun, but not up to the standards required to present this evident to a court ...


So was Robin shooting with him? did he get these marks then? this just opens more questions and puts more doubt into the public arena so TPTB will give him compensation so his legal team can get paid.

Mate - you're stretching .. did you actually watch the programme?

[Katman]

I would need to look again - but they looked like physical scratches rather than dirty marks from touching the mag lips.

And besides, who cares if there's a cover-up, right?

[Banditbandit]

Prior to last night we had screeds of circumstantial evidence pointing to David as the killer, and the Karamalites had a bunch of vague smoke about Robin's possible motives and incredibly spurious explanations for the evidence against David.

Now, the Karamalites have one (count it!) one! piece of circumstantial evidence against Robin. Chuck it on the Robin side of the scales, and they don't move a nanometer.

David did it.

Do you understand the difference between circumstantial evidence and forensic evidence?

Clearly, marks left from loading a gun magazine are not circumstantial evidence ... this is hard science

[leathel]

OK so the old boy loads the rifle and leaves it laying out and David grabs it and Blam Blam .....

Just because he may have loaded it doesn't mean he shot it....

[Banditbandit]

OK so the old boy loads the rifle and leaves it laying out and David grabs it and Blam Blam .....

Just because he may have loaded it doesn't mean he shot it....

The mags for the gun hold 10 shots and 5 shots ... possible to fire fifteen shots all up without reloading one mag ...

There were 19 shells found in the house - some fired some not fired .. the gun jams easily (shown last night) and unfired bullets would be ejected ... as they were in the programme

To leave 19 shells at the scene required one mag to be reloaded ... so the shooter had to reload .. the marks indicate that Robin reloaded .. the marks on the hand left by reloading are pretty ephemeral - and unlikely to last more than an hour ... so Robin was the shooter ..

[MisterD]

Do you understand the difference between circumstantial evidence and forensic evidence?

Clearly, marks left from loading a gun magazine are not circumstantial evidence ... this is hard science


Yes, and it's pretty clear that you don't, so I'll help you out.

Circumstantial evidence is evidence that requires additional inference to link it to a conclusion of fact, versus direct evidence which requires no such inference.

David's and Stephen's fingerprints on the rifle are also hard, forensic science facts and also circumstantial evidence...which should be weighed against the lack of Robin's prints, but I digress.

Direct evidence would be if CCTV or an eyewitness saw what happened.

[Paul in NZ]

If we give David Bain some money will he just fuck off some place and not appear in the media any more?

[Scouse]

I have always thought that David Bain Murdered his Family. But after watching third degree last night I find myself reluctantly thinking that David is innocent of killing his family.

[leathel]

The mags for the gun hold 10 shots and 5 shots ... possible to fire fifteen shots all up without reloading one mag ...

There were 19 shells found in the house - some fired some not fired .. the gun jams easily (shown last night) and unfired bullets would be ejected ... as they were in the programme

To leave 19 shells at the scene required one mag to be reloaded ... so the shooter had to reload .. the marks indicate that Robin reloaded .. the marks on the hand left by reloading are pretty ephemeral - and unlikely to last more than an hour ... so Robin was the shooter ..

So he loaded the 10 shot...then was shot so the marks remained....David loaded the rest and being he wasn't shot the marks are gone.....

[Banditbandit]

David's and Stephen's fingerprints on the rifle are also hard, forensic science facts and also circumstantial evidence...which should be weighed against the lack of Robin's prints, but I digress.

Direct evidence would be if CCTV or an eyewitness saw what happened.

As far as I know there are nine sets of prints on the gun .. none of them up to evidential standards to present to a court .. Stephen's and David's may well have been there .. and so to might Robin's - but they are not able to prove who all the prints belong to ...

Yes ... there is no direct evidence .. and yes there is circumstantial evidence that does not show conclusively who killed the family ... previously to last night I did not think there was sufficient evidence to convict David or to show that Robin did it .. it was something we would never know ...

Now there is forensic evidence to show that Robin Bain loaded at leass one of the .22 rifle magazines shortly before his death ... i.e. that morning .. and if you watched the programme the gun smiths, the ex-army-ex-UN weapons expert and the police forensic scientists all agree that the marks were left by loading the magazine .. and that anyone with those marks had to be the shooter ...

Stop clutching at straws ... it's not that hard to demonstrate ... I did it last night with a mag from my own .22 rifle ..

[Banditbandit]

So he loaded the 10 shot...then was shot so the marks remained....David loaded the rest and being he wasn't shot the marks are gone.....

Who or what did Robin shoot so that he had to reload ???

[leathel]

Who or what did Robin shoot so that he had to reload ???

I cant say for certain...can you... Better ask Robin?

[MisterD]

Stop clutching at straws ... it's not that hard to demonstrate ... I did it last night with a mag from my own .22 rigfle ..

I'm sorry, but marks that might have been caused by Robin loading a magazine at some point still don't overcome the weight of evidence that tells me that David fought and killed his brother than then washed his blood-soaked clothes.

If those marks are from the magazine, I'm going with it being part of David's scene-staging along with putting the magazine on edge next to his father's hand.

[Swoop]

... they looked like physical scratches rather than dirty marks from touching the mag lips.
Scratches would still be there when the coroner examined the body. They were gone by the time the body was examined. The inability to preserve evidence was a serious lapse in the investigation.

To believe David Bain is innocent, you have to believe that Robin shot himself, which to my knowledge thus far, he did not.
It has been proven in court that he could have fired the shot that killed him. It is physically possible.

Also, having cleaned the blood off of a rifle used in a suicide (headshot) of that same type of gun, it is 100% positive that it can be done.

[Road kill]

I handle this crappy .22 that jams all the time so I'm handling the mag and getting dirty hands.

I want to frame you for shooting a bunch of people before killing yourself.

So knowing this rifle like I do I wipe the dirty mag on your hands so you have GSR ect that is consistant with handling the gun.

The guy is a cunning murdering fuck,,,bring back hanging then we could have these conversation from a different perspective.:lol:

[oneofsix]

I handle this crappy .22 that jams all the time so I'm handling the mag and getting dirty hands.

I want to frame you for shooting a bunch of people before killing yourself.

So knowing this rifle like I do I wipe the dirty mag on your hands so you have GSR ect that is consistant with handling the gun.

The guy is a cunning murdering fuck,,,bring back hanging then we could have these conversation from a different perspective.:lol:

giving the level of forensic handling the :Police: showed you might succeed too but somehow I suspect that even our :Police: know the difference between wiped on GSR and and GSR deposits.

Another one that obviously didn't watch the programme

[onearmedbandit]

We humans are an interesting bunch right. We're all presented with the same evidence yet depending on our perspectives etc we interpret it in different ways. Then based solely on what we've been told, and our own understanding of it we fight and argue about it as though we know the truth and anyone else is fucking dead wrong.

My point is; none of us were there, none of us have all the evidence in front of us, and none of us are looking at this from an unbiased point of view. Do I think he's innocent or guilty? Fucked if I know.

[Banditbandit]

I handle this crappy .22 that jams all the time so I'm handling the mag and getting dirty hands.

I want to frame you for shooting a bunch of people before killing yourself.

So knowing this rifle like I do I wipe the dirty mag on your hands so you have GSR ect that is consistant with handling the gun.

It is not all over his hands - it is in two specific small marks ... to me that's a very detailed and subtle approach to placing false evidence ... unlikely to be known by, or used by, yer average paper boy ...


The guy is a cunning murdering fuck,,,bring back hanging then we could have these conversation from a different perspective.:lol:

We dropped hanging because it was proven that innocent people were hung ... do you seriously want to go down that same path ???



WMy point is; none of us were there, none of us have all the evidence in front of us, and none of us are looking at this from an unbiased point of view. Do I think he's innocent or guilty? Fucked if I know.

Yeah .. maybe .. after watching the programme and producing the same marks on my own hands when I loaded a .22 mag I'm convinced of David's innocence .. I wasn't before last night .. then I was like you - fuck knows ...

But even a scientific expert the police use was convinced too.

[MSTRS]

A crime scene that is torched with the co-operation of the authorities with indecent haste = something to hide on the part of said authorities. Like they were going ensure they couldn't be accused of magically finding the 'smoking gun' all over again.

[onearmedbandit]

Yeah .. maybe .. after watching the programme and producing the same marks on my own hands when I loaded a .22 mag I'm convinced of David's innocence .. I wasn't before last night .. then I was like you - fuck knows ...

But even a scientific expert the police use was convinced too.

I didn't see the program last evening so can't comment on it's findings personally, although I understand the argument put across.

[Madness]

I bumped into Duncan Garner in the servo this morning and was surprised to hear that in spite of fronting last nights show, he's not convinced as to David's innocence. I didn't want to start a debate with him as the one going on at home is providing quite enough entertainment already.

[Madness]

I handle this crappy .22 that jams all the time so I'm handling the mag and getting dirty hands.

I want to frame you for shooting a bunch of people before killing yourself.

So knowing this rifle like I do I wipe the dirty mag on your hands so you have GSR ect that is consistant with handling the gun.

The guy is a cunning murdering fuck,,,bring back hanging then we could have these conversation from a different perspective.:lol:

And to ensure you don't get found out for placing this evidence on the body of your dead father you wait for 19 years before some train-spotter raises the flag for you to the media in an attempt to sway the public opinion at a time when such opinion is cemented in so many New Zealanders. This whole time you sit on the knowledge that these marks are apparent in the police photographs when zooming or enlarging but you say nothing, nada, zilch. If Robin Bain could come back from the grave to fully confess half of this country would still believe David did it.

Have you been drug tested lately?

[MisterD]

to me that's a very detailed and subtle approach to placing false evidence ... unlikely to be known by, or used by, yer average paper boy ...

An "average" paperboy that spent several years planning how his paper round could be used as an alibi for a crime.

:Oops:Sorry, that evidence was suppressed.

[Banditbandit]

An "average" paperboy that spent several years planning how his paper round could be used as an alibi for a crime.

:Oops:Sorry, that evidence was suppressed.

I'm sorry - I wasn't being serious when I labelled David Bain an "average paper boy" ...

But for someone who spent several years planning a murder ... if he did that .. he certainly fucked up because he spent 13 years in jail .. and he never once mentioned this evidence he planted??

Get real ...

[MisterD]

and he never once mentioned this evidence he planted??

Well he had a lot on his mind at the time, he probably forgot. He's told so many lies over the years that he's probably lost the real truth from his own mind, there's a good reason Joe Karam does the interviews.

[oneofsix]

Well he had a lot on his mind at the time, he probably forgot. He's told so many lies over the years that he's probably lost the real truth from his own mind, there's a good reason Joe Karam does the interviews.

"at the time" = 13 years of trying to prove his innocence. :yes: indeed, entrenched views.

[scumdog]

The mags for the gun hold 10 shots and 5 shots ... possible to fire fifteen shots all up without reloading one mag ...

There were 19 shells found in the house - some fired some not fired .. the gun jams easily (shown last night) and unfired bullets would be ejected ... as they were in the programme

To leave 19 shells at the scene required one mag to be reloaded ... so the shooter had to reload .. the marks indicate that Robin reloaded .. the marks on the hand left by reloading are pretty ephemeral - and unlikely to last more than an hour ... so Robin was the shooter ..

19 'shells'.
How many were fired?

How many times did he have to shoot each person?

Even with jams the one 10-shot mag have done the trick.

[oneofsix]

19 'shells'.
How many were fired?

How many times did he have to shoot each person?

Even with jams the one 10-shot mag have done the trick.

How do you get 19 shells in one 10 shot mag? That is a good trick, were you on the investigation team? BTW it was your colleges that counted the shells, are you too now questioning them - oh hold on that would mean you weren't on the team. :corn:

[scumdog]

How do you get 19 shells in one 10 shot mag? That is a good trick, were you on the investigation team? BTW it was your colleges that counted the shells, are you too now questioning them - oh hold on that would mean you weren't on the team. :corn:


Did somebody say you could fit 19 shells in the one 10 shot mag?

I must have missed that post...


And why worry who counted the shells?

And why can't you tell me how many shots ended up in each victim??

[MisterD]

"at the time" = 13 years of trying to prove his innocence. :yes: indeed, entrenched views.

"at the time" = just shot his Dad, still covered in his brothers blood and forgot the details of his scene staging.

Yeah, I have a very entrenched view that nobody kills their family, then gets cleaned up to commit suicide. Nobody kills their family and then themselves making it appear that the one surviving member did the deed, then makes the effort to leave a note to that person on a computer apparently exonerating them...when a quick handwritten note would be incontrovertible.

I just can't contort my mind through the hoops required to believe David isn't guilty beyond reasonable doubt, never mind balance of probability.

[imdying]

All the while David is having a quiet chuckle to himself over how long it took for somebody to notice one of the finer details he planted :laugh:

[Edbear]

"at the time" = just shot his Dad, still covered in his brothers blood and forgot the details of his scene staging.

Yeah, I have a very entrenched view that nobody kills their family, then gets cleaned up to commit suicide. Nobody kills their family and then themselves making it appear that the one surviving member did the deed, then makes the effort to leave a note to that person on a computer apparently exonerating them...when a quick handwritten note would be incontrovertible.

I just can't contort my mind through the hoops required to believe David isn't guilty beyond reasonable doubt, never mind balance of probability.

What I find interesting is the typical KB way some members completely ignore relevant posts such as Meteor's post #41. I also note that many of those very same members support the conspiracy views on the other threads.

"If it's anti Police, anti Govt. then it must be right by default, never mind any evidence to the contrary."

What's the bet none of them will answer Meteor's post?

[Katman]

And why can't you tell me how many shots ended up in each victim??

If you'd watched the program last night you wouldn't have to ask.

[scumdog]

If you'd watched the program last night you wouldn't have to ask.


So you don't knew either??
Dang!

[Katman]

What I find interesting is the typical KB way some members completely ignore relevant posts such as Meteor's post #41. I also note that many of those very same members support the conspiracy views on the other threads.



On the contrary Ed.

I find it interesting that many in this thread seem to be very selective of what stories they're prepared to question.

[Katman]

So you don't knew either??
Dang!

Why don't you stop being such a lazy copper and watch the program?

There's a link to the On Demand video earlier in the thread.

[scumdog]

Why don't you stop being such a lazy copper and watch the program?

There's a link to the On Demand video earlier in the thread.

Nah, fishing on KB is more interesting...

[oneofsix]

"at the time" = just shot his Dad, still covered in his brothers blood and forgot the details of his scene staging.

Yeah, I have a very entrenched view that nobody kills their family, then gets cleaned up to commit suicide. Nobody kills their family and then themselves making it appear that the one surviving member did the deed, then makes the effort to leave a note to that person on a computer apparently exonerating them...when a quick handwritten note would be incontrovertible.

I just can't contort my mind through the hoops required to believe David isn't guilty beyond reasonable doubt, never mind balance of probability.
But he didn't forget to leave such a fine detail in the first place?
Been plenty of cases of people that tied up before suicide especially after killing loved ones.
Handwriting requires materials to hand and a computer covers the shakes.
Yes I can see how it is hard to untwist your closed mind through those contorted hoops you have forced it.


All the while David is having a quiet chuckle to himself over how long it took for somebody to notice one of the finer details he planted :laugh:
If it was him he would have been crying that it as taken nearly 20 years, 13 of which he spent in prison, for someone reading an online blog to notice.

[Katman]

Nah, fishing on KB is more interesting...

Ah well, that's up to you.

It's not me making a joke of your profession.

[Katman]

Yes I can see how it is hard to untwist your closed mind through those contorted hoops you have forced it.


Oh, the irony.

[Akzle]

jews did it.

[Drew]

All the while David is having a quiet chuckle to himself over how long it took for somebody to notice one of the finer details he planted :laugh:13 years in the clink, bet he's not laughing that fucken hard.


What I find interesting is the typical KB way some members completely ignore relevant posts such as Meteor's post #41. I also note that many of those very same members support the conspiracy views on the other threads.

"If it's anti Police, anti Govt. then it must be right by default, never mind any evidence to the contrary."

What's the bet none of them will answer Meteor's post?That's quite hypocritical there Ed. You choose not to try and see anyone else' point, as much as the next guy as far as I can see....(yeah yeah, I'm a hypocrite too).



It's not me making a joke of your profession.His profession, or us?

[Drew]

jews did it.

I did fuckin not cunt!

[Madness]

What I find interesting is the typical KB way some members completely ignore relevant posts such as Meteor's post #41.

How is that post relevant considering there is no mention of the new evidence that has come to light and is merely re-hashing evidence that has been analysed repeatedly yet has failed to keep David Bain in prison? Hardly relevant at all, innit?


I also note that many of those very same members support the conspiracy views on the other threads.

Try to stay on topic Ed (ya big troll).


"If it's anti Police, anti Govt. then it must be right by default, never mind any evidence to the contrary."

What's the bet none of them will answer Meteor's post?

There's no point in disagreeing with a copper, unless of course you find yourself wrongly convicted of multiple murders.


Having been a cop in England for 14 years...

Bent as a banana no doubt.

[Edbear]

On the contrary Ed.

I find it interesting that many in this thread seem to be very selective of what stories they're prepared to question.


13 years in the clink, bet he's not laughing that fucken hard.

That's quite hypocritical there Ed. You choose not to try and see anyone else' point, as much as the next guy as far as I can see....(yeah yeah, I'm a hypocrite too).

His profession, or us?


How is that post relevant considering there is no mention of the new evidence that has come to light and is merely re-hashing evidence that has been analysed repeatedly yet has failed to keep David Bain in prison? Hardly relevant at all, innit?



Try to stay on topic Ed (ya big troll).



There's no point in disagreeing with a copper, unless of course you find yourself wrongly convicted of multiple murders.



Bent as a banana no doubt.

I think the points raised in Meteor's post are extremenly relevant and any "new" evidence must be able to be set against known facts. If the courts only ever considered one piece of evidence that seemed legit and ignored other compelling evidence we would have trial by KB.

So if the marks on his finger are relevant, how does that go against the other evidence as per Meteor's post?

To get a conviction beyond reasonable doubt, all the evidence, taken in context must point to the same person or be attributable to that person. Meteor's post raised questions that cannot be ignored or dismissed.

[Katman]

To get a conviction beyond reasonable doubt, all the evidence, taken in context must point to the same person or be attributable to that person. Meteor's post raised questions that cannot be ignored or dismissed.

Do you really think that the Court of Appeal would order a retrial, and then that retrial return a Not Guilty verdict, if there wasn't reasonable doubt?

[Edbear]

Do you really think that the Court of Appeal would order a retrial, and then that retrial return a Not Guilty verdict, if there wasn't reasonable doubt?

Certainly in the case of Robin Bain, how could he be possibly convicted on all the evidence available?

I'll have to refresh my memory on the reason for David being aquitted unless someone can post a link to the case? If there was not enough evidence to get a conviction beyond reasonable doubt, and for the Privy Council to squash his conviction and order a retrial, was it because the evidence said he was innocent, or was it for matters of procedure and technicalities of law?

Considering ALL the evidence we have access to, balance of such would say David was guilty. We hear a lot of how Joe Karam claims David is innocent but have we got access to the actual evidence for him saying that?

I have not seen anyone put up all the evidence point by point against that in Meteor's post in dispute of it.

[Madness]

So if the marks on his finger are relevant, how does that go against the other evidence as per Meteor's post?

If Meteor's post is relevant, how does it go against the new evidence that this thread is about?


Meteor's post raised questions that cannot be ignored or dismissed.

Actually, his entire post can quite easily be ignored.

Back on topic hey?

[Maha]

Did somebody say you could fit 19 shells in the one 10 shot mag?

I must have missed that post...


And why worry who counted the shells?

And why can't you tell me how many shots ended up in each victim??

The shell count is relevant because it proves the shooter had to reload, and the marks on Robins thumb bolster that very point.
I think only one (Steven) took two shots and one bullet on the floor, about half the bullet count (or just under) were left where they (the bullets) fell.

Even with the test firing of the rifle on the programme last night, the jamming was significant, particularly with the 10 shot mag.

[scumdog]

The shell count is relevant because it proves the shooter had to reload, and the marks on Robins thumb bolster that very point.
I think only one (Steven) took two shots and one bullet on the floor, about half the bullet count (or just under) were left where they (the bullets) fell.

Even with the test firing of the rifle on the programme last night, the jamming was significant, particularly with the 10 shot mag.

It always fired the 1st shot OK.
And only Steven (from memory) really realised what was coming.

I wonder why two mags needed?

Anyhoo, the marks on Robins thumb are a red herring.

[Maha]

Anyhoo, the marks on Robins thumb are a red herring.

Sounds fishy....;)

[Madness]

Anyhoo, the marks on Robins thumb are a red herring.

You're good! You should be in persecutions prosecutions.

[Road kill]

giving the level of forensic handling the :Police: showed you might succeed too but somehow I suspect that even our :Police: know the difference between wiped on GSR and and GSR deposits.

Another one that obviously didn't watch the programme

Bet they fucken don't.

I did watch the program,I'm just not convinced an never have been.

[sugilite]

What I find interesting is the typical KB way some members completely ignore relevant posts such as Meteor's post #41.


Ahem, what about the other relevant 98 posts. (and counting)
Relevance is in the eye of the beholder. Annoying as that may be.

[Banditbandit]

I just can't contort my mind through the hoops required to believe David isn't guilty beyond reasonable doubt, never mind balance of probability.

Never mind ... I do understand ... there are still people, after all, who believe the world is flat ...

[Banditbandit]

19 'shells'.
How many were fired?

How many times did he have to shoot each person?

Even with jams the one 10-shot mag have done the trick.

There was more than one shot in each body ... and more than two in some ... and a few unfired catridges on the floor ... I am sure you can find the information on the interdweb as well as I can .. do you think we keep such information floating around inour brains ...

If you weatch the programme that will tell you too ...

How many times do you have to shoot a person with a 22 to kill them? That depends on wher you hit them ...

[Banditbandit]

What I find interesting is the typical KB way some members completely ignore relevant posts such as Meteor's post #41. I also note that many of those very same members support the conspiracy views on the other threads.

"If it's anti Police, anti Govt. then it must be right by default, never mind any evidence to the contrary."

What's the bet none of them will answer Meteor's post?

My answer to Meteer's post is that this new evidence proves Robin Bain fired the gun that morning. That completely over rides any other circumstantial evidence.

[Banditbandit]

To get a conviction beyond reasonable doubt, all the evidence, taken in context must point to the same person or be attributable to that person. Meteor's post raised questions that cannot be ignored or dismissed.

Very good point ... let's put Robin Bain on trial in front of a jury then ...

[oneofsix]

It always fired the 1st shot OK.


Did it? Where is the proof of that? Perhaps it was the misfire that woke Steven because he had used the gun and the sound trigger a response in his sleeping brain whereas the it didn't in the females because they didn't know what that faint sound was so to them it was just another night sound to ignore.

Actually wasn't there evidence that the sister had woken before being shot? Was the real difference that Steven fought whereas she tried to protect herself?

Are you sure you weren't or aren't on the murder squad with that quality of guessing.

[Banditbandit]

Certainly in the case of Robin Bain, how could he be possibly convicted on all the evidence available?

I'll have to refresh my memory on the reason for David being aquitted unless someone can post a link to the case? If there was not enough evidence to get a conviction beyond reasonable doubt, and for the Privy Council to squash his conviction and order a retrial, was it because the evidence said he was innocent, or was it for matters of procedure and technicalities of law?

The verdict was quashed because the Privy Council did not consider that the evidence showed David Bain was guilty beyond reasonable doubt .. the second trial said exactly the same thing.


Considering ALL the evidence we have access to, balance of such would say David was guilty. We hear a lot of how Joe Karam claims David is innocent but have we got access to the actual evidence for him saying that?



On balance is not strong enough to convict - previously, as I have said, I had no idea ... I do not believe there was enough evidence to convict David or to convict Robin (if he had lived) .. it was an unknown ..

Now I am sure Robin did it .. which means David is innocent

[scumdog]

Did it? Where is the proof of that? Perhaps it was the misfire that woke Steven because he had used the gun and the sound trigger a response in his sleeping brain whereas the it didn't in the females because they didn't know what that faint sound was so to them it was just another night sound to ignore.

Actually wasn't there evidence that the sister had woken before being shot? Was the real difference that Steven fought whereas she tried to protect herself?

Are you sure you weren't or aren't on the murder squad with that quality of guessing.

Hmm 5 guesses/conjectures to my 1 (and it was based on the weapon being fired last night)

So OK, you win.

[98tls]

:wacko:Bored with this lets go back to the washing,why the fuck did he do the washing? Must indeed be quite a shock to come home to a dead family but doing something as drastic as washing :brick:

[Bassmatt]

[QUOTE=Banditbandit;1130569778]My answer to Meteer's post is that this new evidence proves Robin Bain fired the gun that morning. That completely over rides any other circumstantial evidence.[/QUOTE

No it doesn't. If it proves anything, it is that he loaded one of the magazines, that is all.
Do we even know if both magazines were used that morning?

[Maha]

I take it those who now have Robin as the killer without doubt because of one single photograph, have also seen the other crime scene photographs totalling around 2000?

Ed may have had a point earlier, using the word conspiracy. At least this one would have merit...could it be that Joe Karam came up with the idea after seeing the photo in question. I recall (afater watching the programme last night) how that chap who had the photo on his laptop, came by it in the first place. He did say that ''he had had no real interest or knowledge of the Bain crime prior'' so why would he have been looking at that particular photo?
Keeping in mind that it had to be super enlarged to really see what he saw, in the normal photograph.

[oneofsix]

:wacko:Bored with this lets go back to the washing,why the fuck did he do the washing? Must indeed be quite a shock to come home to a dead family but doing something as drastic as washing :brick:

Who gives a fuck? Why do other people in similar states of shock do equally seemingly weird things? Because we are complicated creatures.
Doesn't change the powder marks on Robin's thumbs showing he had loaded a used magazine since he had last cleaned his hands.

[Madness]

I recall (afater watching the programme last night) how that chap who had the photo on his laptop, came by it in the first place. He did say that ''he had had no real interest or knowledge of the Bain crime prior'' so why would he have been looking at that particular photo?
Keeping in mind that it had to be super enlarged to really see what he saw, in the normal photograph.

Actually, the trainspotter said he had no interest in the case prior to 2009, after which he developed a very keen interest in the case. He was reading what he called "internet arguments" about the case - how odd.


I take it those who have now have Robin as the killer without doubt because of one single photograph, have also seen the other crime scene photographs totalling around 2000?

None of these 2,000 photographs have shown anything able to uphold the convictions so what's your point?

Sharpen up Mark!


Ed may have had a point earlier...

There is a first time for everything they say but I don't think today is that day.

[Banditbandit]

Bored bored bored .. close minded doppy fuckers will always be close minded dopey fuckers

(Unfortunately some of them become police officers ..

[98tls]

Who gives a fuck? Why do other people in similar states of shock do equally seemingly weird things? Because we are complicated creatures.
Doesn't change the powder marks on Robin's thumbs showing he had loaded a used magazine since he had last cleaned his hands.

I fucking do,there was blood on and in the washing machine,Bain admitted he did the washing,actually in the laundry there blood even on the washing powder packet and other places i cant recall and cant be naffed looking up.Shocks one thing,doing the washing:wacko:

[Maha]

None of these 2,000 photographs have shown anything able to uphold the convictions so what's your point?

Sharpen up Mark!



That was the very point :clap: that out of all those crime scene photos (to be honest, they must have had some sway at the first trial right?) eventually... they (in all probability) proved nothing to the second Jury.

Don't be so blunt Chris.

[scumdog]

[QUOTE=Banditbandit;1130569778]My answer to Meteer's post is that this new evidence proves Robin Bain fired the gun that morning. That completely over rides any other circumstantial evidence.[/QUOTE

No it doesn't. If it proves anything, it is that he loaded one of the magazines, that is all.
Do we even know if both magazines were used that morning?

Doesn't even prove that - it is only a vague possibility..

[scumdog]

Bored bored bored .. close minded doppy fuckers will always be close minded dopey fuckers

(Unfortunately some of them become police officers ..

AND get paid for being one!!:2thumbsup

[Madness]

That was the very point :clap: that out of all those crime scene photos (to be honest, they must have had some sway at the first trial right?) eventually... they (in all probability) proved nothing to the second Jury.

Don't be so blunt Chris.

Still failing to see your point. Mind you, you believe Ed's making points so what is a point to you might just be bollocks to others.

I'll stop being blunt when you stop making things up.

[oneofsix]

I fucking do,there was blood on and in the washing machine,Bain admitted he did the washing,actually in the laundry there blood even on the washing powder packet and other places i cant recall and cant be naffed looking up.Shocks one thing,doing the washing:wacko:

Put like that it makes a weird kind of sense. When in shock you often full back into an automatic response mode. Stunned, in shock he realises he is covered in blood so the logical automatic thing is to wash the clothes before the blood sets especially when you consider it is his families blood, the shocked brain somehow links putting the clothes to right by cleaning off the families blood puts the situation right. :crazy:

[imdying]

I wonder why two mags needed?He used the smaller mag in the gun whilst he stood over his father who he forced to reload the larger one.

[Maha]

Still failing to see your point. Mind you, you believe Ed's making points so what is a point to you might just be bollocks to others.

I'll stop being blunt when you stop making things up.

Get back to me when David is finally exonerated and then ''rightfully'' compensated, it's been fours years in the making already, why is that?
Being acquitted of a crime does not mean innocence of said crime.

You don't know the truth, I don't know the truth, only David Bain knows the truth of happened to his family.

[Clockwork]

An "average" paperboy that spent several years planning how his paper round could be used as an alibi for a crime.

:Oops:Sorry, that evidence was suppressed.

Why was that do you suppose? May be the court thought there was just too much evidence against DB and they wanted to give him a fighting chance. More likely they suppressed it because they felt it was unreliable bullshit not fit to be taken into consideration. (just putting it up there)



Put like that it makes a weird kind of sense. When in shock you often full back into an automatic response mode. Stunned, in shock he realises he is covered in blood so the logical automatic thing is to wash the clothes before the blood sets especially when you consider it is his families blood, the shocked brain somehow links putting the clothes to right by cleaning off the families blood puts the situation right. :crazy:

And I don't really see how that's evidence of a master plan to cover-up his involvement. It's not like he was subtle about it.

[Madness]

Get back to me when David is finally exonerated and then ''rightfully'' compensated, it's been fours years in the making already, why is that?

Quite simple really...

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mcwgpnOoGd1qjgm8jo1_500.jpg

Why has the report from the retired Canadian Judge not been released? Get back to me when this is publicly available.


Being acquitted of a crime does not mean innocence of said crime.

Thanks for the 4th Form legal lesson. Funnily enough I knew that already.


You don't know the truth, I don't know the truth, only David Bain knows the truth of happened to his family.

Correct. In addition to this, the popo have never known the truth either. They might of if they had done their job properly.

[Katman]

In addition to this, the popo have never known the truth either. They might of if they had done their job properly.

They're too busy winding up drongos.

[Indoo]

Now if only they could plausibly explain how a dead man balances a magazine on it's thin edge after killing himself...

[scumdog]

They're too busy winding up drongos.

And some are quite successful at it too I may add!:2thumbsup

[Katman]

Now if only they could plausibly explain how a dead man balances a magazine on it's thin edge after killing himself...

Could it not have been placed there by Robin Bain before he shot himself?

[Madness]

And some are quite successful at it too I may add!:2thumbsup

If only they were equally as successful in conducting murder investigations :facepalm:

[James Deuce]

I'm just disappointed we STILL can't buy a line of tribute jerseys from yd.

[neels]

As above, only David Bain knows the truth, and he doesn't seem to be saying much himself.

In the end if he did do it, he killed his own family and facilitated the removal of a local eyesore in the process, and he doesn't seem to have designs on killing any other members of society.

If he didn't do it, then society was robbed of the services of a paper boy for 13 years, and the guilty party is either dead or hasn't gone on to killing any other members of society.

There is enough doubt either way to prevent absolutely declaring him innocent, and no evidence of a deliberate attempt to falsely imprison him, so he doesn't get any of the money I'm forced to pay to the gummint thanks.

[Katman]

And some are quite successful at it too I may add!:2thumbsup

Yep, you're a real winner.

[Edbear]

After looking at this new evidence and the blown up photo especially, to claim this was conclusive proof Robin loaded the mag is drawing a very long bow. The news tonight also said only David and Stephen's prints were found on the rifle. That makes sense as any gun owner regularly cleans their weapon after use.

Also in response to a previous poster, he was not found not guilty, only that the Prosecution failed to prove their case beyond reasonable doubt. Given the evidence we do have access to, that is a surprise in itself. There was, according to reports, no forensic evidence pointing to Robin Bain either and all the defense presented was to demonstrate that it was plausible and possible for Robin to shoot himself. They could not present any proof that would discount David and still haven't.

[Edbear]

Could it not have been placed there by Robin Bain before he shot himself?

Obvious answer is that it would have had his prints on it... Basic.

[Katman]

Also in response to a previous poster, he was not found not guilty, only that the Prosecution failed to prove their case beyond reasonable doubt.

Actually, I think he was.

I think that's what...."How do you find?" "Not Guilty".....means.

Dumbarse.

[Bald Eagle]

I have always thought that David Bain Murdered his Family. But after watching third degree last night I find myself reluctantly thinking that David is innocent of killing his family.

There is the power of the media in action. Never forget the Justice system isnt about what happened, its about what can be proven, until the media says otherwise.

[neels]

There is the power of the media in action. Never forget the Justice system isnt about what happened, its about what can be proven, until the media says otherwise.
"This isn't a court of justice son, this is a court of law"

[Akzle]

That makes sense as any gun owner regularly cleans their weapon after use.


Actually. The uncle has a 22 he bought second hand (at a police auction :whistle:) in '78.
The only thing close to maintenance is a bit of engine oil on the bolt when it stops working...
Its not a weapon. Its a tool. Like

[neels]

Actually. The uncle has a 22 he bought second hand (at a police auction :whistle:) in '78.
The only thing close to maintenance is a bit of engine oil on the bolt when it stops working...
Its not a weapon. Its a tool. Like
True dat.

Should clean my ruger after sticking a couple of hundred rounds through it at the easter bunny hunt, but I've been told that the only maintenance that should be done is to wash the moving parts in petrol if it gets really dirty and put it back together dry.

And that it's a tool.

[mansell]

There is the power of the media in action. Never forget the Justice system isnt about what happened, its about what can be proven, until the media says otherwise.

I agree here, this is bloody proof that our media is dictating how we think. A couple of reminders, firstly the police persued the murder suicide theory but struggled getting the evidence to show this, and secondly (and my personal favourite) Robin Bain hadf a full bladder when he died, I dont know about you young chaps but the first thing I do every morning is have a piss and that is not a conscious choice but ingrained through the years. So here is a 50 something man getting out of bed and deciding to shoot his entire family, but he doesn't piss first. This just doesn't do it for me. BTW if Robin was so keen to leave only one family member alive why did he then go to the hassle of setting up so much evidence against him.
I still firmly believe that David is guilty and feel sorry for the memory of Robin Bain, he hasn't had the chance to keep shouting his innocence until people believe him.

[Katman]

Obvious answer is that it would have had his prints on it... Basic.

Really?

I thought the issue of the validity of prints being presented as evidence had already been mentioned in this thread.

Were there any prints on the magazine?

[Indoo]

Could it not have been placed there by Robin Bain before he shot himself?

Which relies on the equally improbable scenario of his body after death landing in such a position so as not only avoid knocking over the magazine but so that his fingertips are within millimeters of touching it.

[Madness]

Robin Bain hadf a full bladder when he died, I dont know about you young chaps but the first thing I do every morning is have a piss and that is not a conscious choice but ingrained through the years. So here is a 50 something man getting out of bed and deciding to shoot his entire family, but he doesn't piss first. This just doesn't do it for me.

You're suggesting a scenario where Robin Bain had a good nights sleep, woke up early & decided on the spot to murder his family? Alternatively, if he had pre-meditated the murders, are you suggesting he had a good nights sleep then woke up and went straight to work knocking them off? This just doesn't do it for me. I believe there's more chance of him being up all night, waiting for David to go off on his paper round. He probably drank coffee or tea all night and when the time came, taking a piss was the last thing on his mind.

David may or may not have committed the crimes - we don't know. What we do know is the popo royally fucked up the investigation leading to the current situation yet nobody is being held accountable for this. This should come as no surprise as it's par for the course when it comes to the N.Z Police.

[Katman]

Which relies on the equally improbable scenario of his body after death landing in such a position so as not only avoid knocking over the magazine but so that his fingertips are within millimeters of touching it.

Maybe he was sitting on the floor next to the magazine when he shot himself.

[BMWST?]

Scratches would still be there when the coroner examined the body. They were gone by the time the body was examined. The inability to preserve evidence was a serious lapse in the investigation.

It has been proven in court that he could have fired the shot that killed him. It is physically possible.

Also, having cleaned the blood off of a rifle used in a suicide (headshot) of that same type of gun, it is 100% positive that it can be done.

what/\? who cleaned the gun then?Robin wouldnt have bothered would he?Why would he clean the gun before using it on himself?

[oneofsix]

Scratches would still be there when the coroner examined the body. They were gone by the time the body was examined. The inability to preserve evidence was a serious lapse in the investigation.

It has been proven in court that he could have fired the shot that killed him. It is physically possible.

Also, having cleaned the blood off of a rifle used in a suicide (headshot) of that same type of gun, it is 100% positive that it can be done.


what/\? who cleaned the gun then?Robin wouldnt have bothered would he?Why would he clean the gun before using it on himself?

:rofl: classic kb twisting of what was meant. :2thumbsup

[Mom]

If Robin killed his family, who killed Robin?

I really struggle to accept that David Bain did not kill a single member of his family.

No compensation for David vote from me.

[Madness]

If Robin killed his family, who killed Robin?

Maha really is the brains in your house eh?

[Katman]

If Robin killed his family, who killed Robin?



You and Mark really are a perfect match.

:facepalm:

[meteor]

Do you really think that the Court of Appeal would order a retrial, and then that retrial return a Not Guilty verdict, if there wasn't reasonable doubt?

Appellant courts don't examine all evidence adduced at trial rather finding on the points of law or process appealed against.
A NG verdict was not surprising with the limited evidence and directions given to the jury.
Anyone who thinks the justice system is just is living in a bubble. And a NG verdict is not a finding of innocence... Law 101

There is one person alive that knows what the truth is what did he say at trial, oh yeah...

[oneofsix]

who killed Robin?


The sparrow with his little bow and arrow.

[Katman]

And a NG verdict is not a finding of innocence... Law 101


Yes, we've already covered that.

Do try to keep up.

[Indoo]

Maybe he was sitting on the floor next to the magazine when he shot himself.

No, and the defense case relied upon him contorting his body and using a chair or standing over the rifle in order to manage to shoot himself.

Either the magazine falling and landing on its edge, or his body falling with his fingers touching it, are equally implausible and would be impossible to replicate in reality.

[scissorhands]

when David meets his dad in the afterlife
I bet he'll have something to say to him

[Winston001]

Robin's (deceased) fingerprints were taken. The police have today said:



"We know for example that Robin Bain was doing work to the roof and spouting of his Every Street home in the days leading up to the killings - any Kiwi handyman knows the sort of damage this can do to the hands. Post mortem examination of Robin Bain's hands show a number of minor abrasions and marks you would expect to find with someone familiar with manual work.



"Indeed, police have today conducted a preliminary examination of fingerprints taken from Robin Bain after his death. These prints show an absence of fingerprint markings in the same place on his right thumb as the dark marks appearing in the photograph. Our fingerprint experts advise that this is consistent with someone sustaining cuts or damage to the fingers prior to prints being taken, which would then affect the print image."

[Virago]

when david meets his dad in the afterlife
i bet he'll have something to say to him

"Bang...!"

[Katman]

Robin's (deceased) fingerprints were taken. The police have today said:



"We know for example that Robin Bain was doing work to the roof and spouting of his Every Street home in the days leading up to the killings - any Kiwi handyman knows the sort of damage this can do to the hands. Post mortem examination of Robin Bain's hands show a number of minor abrasions and marks you would expect to find with someone familiar with manual work.



"Indeed, police have today conducted a preliminary examination of fingerprints taken from Robin Bain after his death. These prints show an absence of fingerprint markings in the same place on his right thumb as the dark marks appearing in the photograph. Our fingerprint experts advise that this is consistent with someone sustaining cuts or damage to the fingers prior to prints being taken, which would then affect the print image."


So the coroner took detailed photos of every mark on Robin Bain's hands but not the 'cuts' on his thumb?

[Madness]

These prints show an absence of fingerprint markings in the same place on his right thumb as the dark marks appearing in the photograph. Our fingerprint experts advise that this is consistent with someone sustaining cuts or damage to the fingers prior to prints being taken, which would then affect the print image."

I wonder when they'll release the fingerprint images behind this statement?

Who are their fingerprint experts?, J. Collins & A. Tolley?

[Indoo]

You mean aside from fingerprint images that have been all over the news this afternoon?

[Bassmatt]

So the coroner took detailed photos of every mark on Robin Bain's hands but not the 'cuts' on his thumb?


I wonder when they'll release the fingerprint images behind this statement?

Who are their fingerprint experts?, J. Collins & A. Tolley?

TV3 showed the thumbprint, I think it was Campbell Live.
One of the marks on Robins thumb showed up pretty strongly on the print.

[Winston001]

Oh yes, the prints were released today, no secrets there.


Here is the thing which really annoys me though - the TV3 people did not talk to the police or ask for a response to these startling revelations before televising the show. I watched it and kept waiting for them to introduce another explanation or at least some sort of prosecution response. Journalists are trained to provide both sides but seemingly that gets forgotten...


“Police:

However, I am mindful that this theory has been put forward through a programme whose makers chose not to seek comment from police prior to broadcast, and who also refused to provide details about their story when approached by police on Tuesday.


“Had they done so then we would have pointed out that fingerprints had been presented in evidence and have always been available through the court to help them decide if their story stacked up.”

[Madness]

You mean aside from fingerprint images that have been all over the news this afternoon?

Post a link or an image then, smarty-pants. I've not seen 'em and after 10 minutes of searching TV3 on-demand I can't be arsed.

[oneofsix]

Post a link or an image then, smarty-pants. I've not seen 'em and after 10 minutes of searching TV3 on-demand I can't be arsed.

Try the herald

[Madness]

http://img.scoop.co.nz/stories/images/1306/5d16d4db53378b7d67a5.jpeg

This it?

I'd like to see the same test as shown on the show last night followed by fingerprinting done some time after. That would be an interesting comparison.

[Coldrider]

Oh yes, the prints were released today, no secrets there.


Here is the thing which really annoys me though - the TV3 people did not talk to the police or ask for a response to these startling revelations before televising the show. I watched it and kept waiting for them to introduce another explanation or at least some sort of prosecution response. Journalists are trained to provide both sides but seemingly that gets forgotten...


“Police:

However, I am mindful that this theory has been put forward through a programme whose makers chose not to seek comment from police prior to broadcast, and who also refused to provide details about their story when approached by police on Tuesday.


“Had they done so then we would have pointed out that fingerprints had been presented in evidence and have always been available through the court to help them decide if their story stacked up.”When the participants where discharging a .22 (the bain .22 i think), into a cannister and taking their thumbprints after reloading the cartridge, there was a blue commodore in the background, with led lights in the back window. Just saying, not everyone is fooled.

[Winston001]

When the participants where discharging a .22 (the bain .22 i think), into a cannister and taking their thumbprints after reloading the cartridge, there was a blue commodore in the background, with led lights in the back window. Just saying, not everyone is fooled.

Hang on. TV3 were only able to do the tests with the co-operation of the police and that's no secret. But what they did not do is show the police the intended documentary a week or two ago (they take months to put together) and ask for their response. It was shock journalism - and shoddy stuff.

Five people died at Every Street Dunedin. Five people who could have expected to live out their natural lives but for some reason they get forgotten in the hysteria over David's case. Five members of our community who were murdered. They deserve our respect and the dignity of considered discussion.

[Indoo]

\ there was a blue commodore in the background, with led lights in the back window. Just saying, not everyone is fooled.

I don't think courier post provides transportation and supervised access for murder weapons yet, which might explain the presence of a Police car.

Bit embarrassing for the T.V show involved, I bet they wish now they had made at least a pretense at presenting a balanced story.

[Winston001]

The TV3 doco adds an interesting question to the case although its not a gamebreaker IMHO. The thumbprint suggests scars not surface marks. For what its worth:



1. Full Bladder - originally this convinced me by itself. As a 50ish male it is impossible to imagine waking up and not taking a piss. Immediately. If you were nervous then you'd be up in the night and still need to urgently pee in the morning. Nevertheless a pathologist testified at the second trial that he autopsies deceased males with full bladders, so it is possible.





2. Computer message. This is a 50+ yr old man, a school teacher, in 1994, a man who grew up using a fountain pen, graduated to a ballpoint, and normally used chalk and a pencil. He murders his wife - then he murders his children whom he gave life to, and in the process has a fight with Stephen - then knowing David is due in the house any minute, he switches on the computer?? And waits for it to boot up so he can open the word processor to type a final message? Really? Would anybody here do that?

[BMWST?]

The TV3 doco adds an interesting question to the case although its not a gamebreaker IMHO. The thumbprint suggests scars not surface marks. For what its worth:



1. Full Bladder - originally this convinced me by itself. As a 50ish male it is impossible to imagine waking up and not taking a piss. Immediately. If you were nervous then you'd be up in the night and still need to urgently pee in the morning. Nevertheless a pathologist testified at the second trial that he autopsies deceased males with full bladders, so it is possible.


2. Computer message. This is a 50+ yr old man, a school teacher, in 1994, a man who grew up using a fountain pen, graduated to a ballpoint, and normally used chalk and a pencil. He murders his wife - then he murders his children whom he gave life to, and in the process has a fight with Stephen - then knowing David is due in the house any minute, he switches on the computer?? And waits for it to boot up so he can open the word processor to type a final message? Really? Would anybody here do that?


the second point is important.1994 computers are not the same as they are now,where every one has one and everyone uses them without thinking.Quite the opposite for a 50 yr old in 1994 i would think.

[F5 Dave]

? . . .


2. Computer message. This is a 50+ yr old man, a school teacher, in 1994, a man who grew up using a fountain pen, graduated to a ballpoint, and normally used chalk and a pencil. He murders his wife - then he murders his children whom he gave life to, and in the process has a fight with Stephen - then knowing David is due in the house any minute, he switches on the computer?? And waits for it to boot up so he can open the word processor to type a final message? Really? Would anybody here do that?

Far sooner than a teenage boy would do the washing

[Littleman]

Well I guess if we are to believe that this is a compelling clue overlooked proving David's innocence, we can some awkward moments between him and Karam in the near future.

[Erelyes]

Here is the thing which really annoys me though - the TV3 people did not talk to the police or ask for a response to these startling revelations before televising the show. I watched it and kept waiting for them to introduce another explanation or at least some sort of prosecution response. Journalists are trained to provide both sides but seemingly that gets forgotten...


“Police:

However, I am mindful that this theory has been put forward through a programme whose makers chose not to seek comment from police prior to broadcast, and who also refused to provide details about their story when approached by police on Tuesday.


“Had they done so then we would have pointed out that fingerprints had been presented in evidence and have always been available through the court to help them decide if their story stacked up.”

Yet a Police officer delivered the weapon in a Police vehicle for testing.

Perhaps he didn't clue any other officers up about what they were obviously trying to achieve by testing the weapon...

What I find annoying, is that they never showed somebody attempting to place these marks (using a mag) on another persons thumb. I would have though that'd be the first counter-argument to test the validity of, no?

[Berries]

Yeah. Nah.

[Mom]

*WHOOSH! The sound of irony going right over heads.

[oneofsix]

Yet a Police officer delivered the weapon in a Police vehicle for testing.

Perhaps he didn't clue any other officers up about what they were obviously trying to achieve by testing the weapon...

What I find annoying, is that they never showed somebody attempting to place these marks (using a mag) on another persons thumb. I would have though that'd be the first counter-argument to test the validity of, no?

That would be the typical position of once our mind is made up we can never be wrong and never change it because this would be seen as backing down and therefore weak. Perhaps if they were more open minded and consecrated on doing their job properly we wouldn't have these cock-ups by the cops and they might understand that having an open mind is a position of strength, sticking to your guns is just a stubborn mule.

[oneofsix]

Well I guess if we are to believe that this is a compelling clue overlooked proving David's innocence, we can some awkward moments between him and Karam in the near future.

More of a worry for the forensic experts and :Police: as they are the "professionals" :lol:

[Motig]

Certainly not a game breaker in my opinion.

[Paul in NZ]

Well from the little I have read on this the whole darn family were a little - erm - unusual... Relatively normal (as it lets just guess most of us here have NOT slaughtered our families this morning) people trying to second guess what the highly unusual Bains might or might not do is pointless...

Give him some money - on the condition he fucks off some place else and never appears in the media again and shoot anyone who ever brings up the case again forever...

[scissorhands]

Hang on. TV3 were only able to do the tests with the co-operation of the police and that's no secret. But what they did not do is show the police the intended documentary a week or two ago (they take months to put together) and ask for their response. It was shock journalism - and shoddy stuff.

Five people died at Every Street Dunedin. Five people who could have expected to live out their natural lives but for some reason they get forgotten in the hysteria over David's case. Five members of our community who were murdered. They deserve our respect and the dignity of considered discussion.

they also deserve good crime scene forensics

[scissorhands]

The TV3 doco adds an interesting question to the case although its not a gamebreaker IMHO. The thumbprint suggests scars not surface marks. For what its worth:



1. Full Bladder - originally this convinced me by itself. As a 50ish male it is impossible to imagine waking up and not taking a piss. Immediately. If you were nervous then you'd be up in the night and still need to urgently pee in the morning. Nevertheless a pathologist testified at the second trial that he autopsies deceased males with full bladders, so it is possible.





2. Computer message. This is a 50+ yr old man, a school teacher, in 1994, a man who grew up using a fountain pen, graduated to a ballpoint, and normally used chalk and a pencil. He murders his wife - then he murders his children whom he gave life to, and in the process has a fight with Stephen - then knowing David is due in the house any minute, he switches on the computer?? And waits for it to boot up so he can open the word processor to type a final message? Really? Would anybody here do that?




possibilities are:
he didnt want to wake others by having the pee
he was shaking so badly after the deed he couldnt write

but yeah who knows

[Banditbandit]

Yes, we've already covered that.

Do try to keep up.

Trying to keep up is what gets the popo after us ...

[Drew]

Trying to keep up is what gets the popo after us ...

Which is why I go out front.

Wait, what are we talking about?

[Banditbandit]

Which is why I go out front.

Wait, what are we talking about?

Yeah .. but I am more inclined to open the throttle if I'm out in front ... I like to sit behind a rider keepinmg a good steady speed ... only if I get way back to I try to keep up ...

(Oh ... hang on .. we are supposedly talking about David Bain and marks on Robin's thumb ... )

[Swoop]

what/\? who cleaned the gun then?Robin wouldnt have bothered would he?Why would he clean the gun before using it on himself?
Go read the post again. You are mis-reading it.



As for cleaning the Bain's gun. It certainly looked as if it needs it and also the attention of a qualified gunsmith. Talk about a "jam-O-matic".

[Scouse]

now if only they could plausibly explain how a dead man balances a magazine on it's thin edge after killing himself...because he swaped magazines jeez you will never make it to detective

[Drew]

(Oh ... hang on .. we are supposedly talking about David Bain and marks on Robin's thumb ... )

Here's the pic.

https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/1044861_10151486748657001_208762638_n.jpg

Did the cops place the clip there at the time, for their own reference later on. To illustrate that he might have loaded the clip?

[duckonin]

Fuck, now I have to think for you mutts. Of course DB committed the act, he is the only cunt alive. Jeeezzz !:nya:

[scissorhands]

one other TV image of the marks, showed them finish with a curve as in a long wipe, finished by a hook away to the side

consistent with running your digit along a magazine and pulling off sideways to repeat the process

both marks had the identical curve finish, almost identical, suggesting they were made at the same time, by the same type of movement of the thumb

fairly convincing marks really, consistent with the loading of a magazine

[scissorhands]

Did the cops place the clip there at the time, for their own reference later on. To illustrate that he might have loaded the clip?

do crime scenes have objects moved for the purpose of photography?

[Maha]

Maha really is the brains in your house eh?


You and Mark really are a perfect match.

:facepalm:

Getting someone to take the bait on here is all too easy. Notice a couple of known bait takers working the thread, add a few key words into a random post and the circling bait takers grab on quicker than a love sick great white. :buggerd:

I need a new challenge.:motu:

Oh noooooooo I have just done it again :pinch:

[Drew]

do crime scenes have objects moved for the purpose of photography?So long as the original placement was photographed and noted, I don't see why they wouldn't move it. For fear of the thumb having the marks rubbed off in transit or summat.

[Madness]

Getting someone to take the bait on here is all too easy. Notice a couple of known bait takers working the thread, add a few key words into a random post and the circling bait takers grab on quicker than a love sick great white. :buggerd:

I need a new challenge.:motu:

Oh noooooooo I have just done it again :pinch:

Did you come up with that all by yourself or did Mom tell you what to type again?

[Katman]

Getting someone to take the bait on here is all too easy. Notice a couple of known bait takers working the thread, add a few key words into a random post and the circling bait takers grab on quicker than a love sick great white.



Ah yes, the old 'Whoops, just made myself sound stupid so I'll pretend I was trolling' trick.

You guys could get together with scumdog and make a threesome.

[Drew]

Ah yes, the old 'Whoops, just made myself sound stupid so I'll pretend I was trolling' trick.C'mon man, we've all done it from time to time. (Or every other post in my case).

[Swoop]

The thumbprint suggests scars not surface marks.

I'm not seeing it that way. Oddly, the direction of the marking appears to go the wrong way in the fingerprint compared to the photo.
Definately not scars or cuts, as the pathologist was known to be pedantic and photographed little markings on the body, but didn't find anything worthy of photographing on the fingers.

[leathel]

A post from else where...


It was a lucky guess when David Bain told 111 ambulance officer they are all dead, despite later saying he only saw two bodies
Again a lucky guess when DB told police officer they are all dead
The 25 minute gap between DB finding his family dead and calling 111 is in no way connected with trying to wash clothes and removed blood.
The bruise on David’s head and scratches on his chest and graze on his knee – none of which he could explain, were just a coincidence
The lens from his glasses found in Stephen’s room happened weeks ago and he never noticed OR someone else had borrowed the glasses
The lack of fresh injuries on Robin despite the massive struggle with Stephen is just the product of healthy living
David’s finger prints on the gun are from a previous time
David telling a friend he had premonition something bad was going to happen was a genuine psychic experience
Stephen’s blood on David’s clothing was nothing to do with the struggle – OR someone else borrowed his clothes
The lock and key to the rifle being found in David’s room is not relevant as they were obviously placed there
Robin decided to wash David’s green jersey to remove blood and the fibres from jersey found under Steven’s finger nails
David’s bloody palm print on the washing machine was from him checking the bodies
The Ambulance officer was wrong when he said in his opinion Bain was pretending to have a fit
Robin Bain would logically wear gloves to prevent fingerprints despite it being a murder-suicide
Robin Bain didn’t wear gloves as he loaded the magazine…then put on gloves to kill his family, then took them off without smudging the “magazine marks”.
That Robin Bain would type a message on a computer for David telling him he is the only one who deserves to live, instead of writing a note. A hand written note incidentally would have cleared David.
Also that having just shot his family, and knowing David was due home, that Robin would wait 44 seconds for the computer to boot up to leave a message
Robin would decide David deserved to live, but go out of his way to frame him for murder
Robin Bain placed fibres from Davids jersey under Stephen’s finger nails
Robin would finish shooting his family, remove the magazine, place it on the ground carefully on standing upright on its side, then shoot himself so that when his body fell his hand was right beside the magazine which remained standing on its side.
Robin Bain would shoot himself with a gun in the most awkward way possible?
That Robin Bain changed jerseys after he had killed his family and in particular Stephen Bain, washed the jersey, hung it on the line and then change into a brown jersey before killing himself?
That there is a logical reason that David Bain can not account for the injuries on his face, the bruise or the scraped knee, yet knows he did not have them during his paper run.
That Robin Bain put blood on the inside of David’s duvet and on his light switch
That there is an innocent explanation for why David says he put on washing before he discovered the bodies, yet there is a blood print on the washing machine.
That Laniet was being paranoid when she told friends she was scared of David
That the “family meeting” David called the previous night and insisted everyone attended was not a way to make sure everyone would be at home to kill.
That Robin Bain would wear a hat while shooting himself in the head.
That even though David told a relative he hated his father, his father did not know this and deliberately decided David was the only one who deserved to live
That David either imagined hearing Laniet gurgling or she gurgled 20 minutes after death
That Laniet allegations of incent with Robin was true, as was her claims she had given birth three times by the age of 12 and a half.
That Robin Bain managed to kill four family members without a single trace of his blood, skin, or DNA being left at the scene.
That it is a coincidence that on the morning of the murders Bain took his dog onto a property, ensuring he would be noticed to give him an alibi.
That the magazine found balanced on an edge next to Robin was not placed there by David but fell onto its edge from Robin’s arms.
That a sickly Robin Bain managed to overpower his teenage son who put up a furious fight
That Robin Bain went and got the newspaper from outside, despite planning to shoot himself
That Robin Bain did all of the above without taking a piss.

I don't care either way but I also think you can look at that pic and come up with other answers and prove how they got there just as well.... given time and thought. You can use also sorts of bits of evidence but the whole picture still points more to David IMHO.... just to many F/ups from the boys in blue to prove it beyond reasonable doubt.??

[Maha]

Did you come up with that all by yourself or did Mom tell you what to type again?


Ah yes, the old 'Whoops, just made myself sound stupid so I'll pretend I was trolling' trick.

You guys could get together with scumdog and make a threesome.

:killingme... you two make Akzle look all grown up and shit :lol:

[scissorhands]

Shooting sprees are normally committed by pariah losers with no friends, depressed and angry with the world. Much like Robin was.

David was relatively emotionally happy, well adjusted and social, I believe. I think he was active in school clubs and had friends and a girlfriend of sorts

Robin had already been accustomed to violating and controlling his family for many years.

He was a monster of the worst kind, up there with that paedophile northland headmaster

Often autocratic family heads and cult leaders instruct or facilitate the suicide and genocide of their family and tribal units

Based on David and Robins pre killings characters, Robin would surely be the likely pick of the two

[Edbear]

Really?

I thought the issue of the validity of prints being presented as evidence had already been mentioned in this thread.

Were there any prints on the magazine?

Well, unless he cleaned it after he killed hisself... :whistle:

[scissorhands]

Maybe what Laniet was fearful of was David blowing the story on Dad
This would be a likely motive for Robin to kill

But, yeah you never know

[MisterD]

Robin had already been accustomed to violating and controlling his family for many years.

He was a monster of the worst kind, up there with that paedophile northland headmaster

Objection: Hearsay (not to mention contradicted by people that knew him)



Often autocratic family heads and cult leaders instruct or facilitate the suicide and genocide of their family and tribal units

It was David who was the dominant personality in the household, and it was David that Laniet lived in fear of.

[Drew]

It was David who was the dominant personality in the household, and it was David that Laniet lived in fear of.Objection. Hearsay!

[MisterD]

Objection. Hearsay!

Well yes, strictly speaking, but the source is direct evidence from a school friend of Laniet's I just can't find the reference at the moment.

[Edbear]

TV3 showed the thumbprint, I think it was Campbell Live.
One of the marks on Robins thumb showed up pretty strongly on the print.

Which does indicate a cut, not residue.


Oh yes, the prints were released today, no secrets there.


Here is the thing which really annoys me though - the TV3 people did not talk to the police or ask for a response to these startling revelations before televising the show. I watched it and kept waiting for them to introduce another explanation or at least some sort of prosecution response. Journalists are trained to provide both sides but seemingly that gets forgotten...


“Police:

However, I am mindful that this theory has been put forward through a programme whose makers chose not to seek comment from police prior to broadcast, and who also refused to provide details about their story when approached by police on Tuesday.


“Had they done so then we would have pointed out that fingerprints had been presented in evidence and have always been available through the court to help them decide if their story stacked up.”

Funny the David camp chooses now to bring this up.


I agree here, this is bloody proof that our media is dictating how we think. A couple of reminders, firstly the police persued the murder suicide theory but struggled getting the evidence to show this, and secondly (and my personal favourite) Robin Bain hadf a full bladder when he died, I dont know about you young chaps but the first thing I do every morning is have a piss and that is not a conscious choice but ingrained through the years. So here is a 50 something man getting out of bed and deciding to shoot his entire family, but he doesn't piss first. This just doesn't do it for me. BTW if Robin was so keen to leave only one family member alive why did he then go to the hassle of setting up so much evidence against him.
I still firmly believe that David is guilty and feel sorry for the memory of Robin Bain, he hasn't had the chance to keep shouting his innocence until people believe him.


Which relies on the equally improbable scenario of his body after death landing in such a position so as not only avoid knocking over the magazine but so that his fingertips are within millimeters of touching it.

Careful you are introducing logical thought to this thread, that's not the KB way...


Actually. The uncle has a 22 he bought second hand (at a police auction :whistle:) in '78.
The only thing close to maintenance is a bit of engine oil on the bolt when it stops working...
Its not a weapon. Its a tool. Like

Did you miss the bit about only David's and Stephen's prints being found on the gun?

[oneofsix]

Which does indicate a cut, not residue.
The photos (:Police:) show residual, so what if there was a cut under it or close to? If a micro abrasion cut as the :Police: suggest it could have even been caused by loading both and then reloading at least one magazine




Funny the David camp chooses now to bring this up.
They didn't. They were as surprised as the :Police: and prosecution, even if pleased.





Careful you are introducing logical thought to this thread, that's not the KB way...
Given what you are calling logic there would be no threat there.



Did you miss the bit about only David's and Stephen's prints being found on the gun?

Did you miss the bit about all the other prints on the gun and the bit about Robin having recently used the gun?

[Banditbandit]

Well yes, strictly speaking, but the source is direct evidence from a school friend of Laniet's I just can't find the reference at the moment.

It still has no more or no less weight than what was said about Robin fucking his daughter ..

[scissorhands]

Maybe David was too, weird religion and all

[Madness]

:killingme... you two make Akzle look all grown up and shit :lol:

Tell me, do you two wear matching onesies when you're on here during winter?

[Edbear]

The photos (:Police:) show residual, so what if there was a ...


Did you miss the bit about all the other prints on the gun and the bit about Robin having recently used the gun?


Did you read this? www.justice.govt.nz/media/in-focus/topic.../David-Bain...A.../file

It is a link to the complete trial and appeal records.

Notable is a comment by the Appeals Court:

"There is no evidence positively implicating Robin Bain on any tenable basis. Motive and the state of his mind must be seen in that light. Those matters could not possibly be seen by a reasonable jury as producing a reasonable doubt as to David's guilt which is so clearly proved by the combination of affirmative poinbts to which we have drawn attention."

Also noted and never answered is the fact that;

"David confidently denied matters that he could not remember even though they actually happened." David said they did not happen when in fact they did.

And in the case of Robin Bain;

"no-one else's blood was found on him."
"No gunpowder traces were found on his hands."
"His fingerprints were not on the rifle."

Now can any bright spark here tell us how Robin did it in the light of these facts?

[oneofsix]

Did you read this? www.justice.govt.nz/media/in-focus/topic.../David-Bain...A.../file

It is a link to the complete trial and appeal records.

Notable is a comment by the Appeals Court:

"There is no evidence positively implicating Robin Bain on any tenable basis. Motive and the state of his mind must be seen in that light. Those matters could not possibly be seen by a reasonable jury as producing a reasonable doubt as to David's guilt which is so clearly proved by the combination of affirmative poinbts to which we have drawn attention."

Also noted and never answered is the fact that;

"David confidently denied matters that he could not remember even though they actually happened." David said they did not happen when in fact they did.

And in the case of Robin Bain;

"no-one else's blood was found on him."
"No gunpowder traces were found on his hands."
"His fingerprints were not on the rifle."

Now can any bright spark here tell us how Robin did it in the light of these facts?

These would be the NZ courts and appeals that the privy council said got it wrong and should start again?
How can they say his prints weren't on the gun when there were prints on the gun they couldn't identify. Jsut shows the privy council and only true trail are right - case against David not proven.

[Madness]

O.M.Fucking G!

http://www.thecivilian.co.nz/new-evidence-implicates-robin-bain-in-murder-of-scott-guy/

[Edbear]

These would be the NZ courts and appeals that the privy council said got it wrong and should start again?
How can they say his prints weren't on the gun when there were prints on the gun they couldn't identify. Jsut shows the privy council and only true trail are right - case against David not proven.

So you haven't read it then? Have you also read the Privy Council's report?

You make unsubstantiated comments without reference. Typical of many here.

I like to know what I'm talking about, so I go and read stuff, you know, like the actual case files..?

[Katman]

So you haven't read it then?

I just keep getting the message 'The requested page could not be found on the Ministry of Justice website'.

[Drew]

Did you read this? www.justice.govt.nz/media/in-focus/topic.../David-Bain...A.../file (http://www.justice.govt.nz/media/in-focus/topic.../David-Bain...A.../file)




I just keep getting the message 'The requested page could not be found on the Ministry of Justice website'.

Yep, link no worky worky.

[Madness]

Yep, link no worky worky.

Ed's been using this site (http://emptybottle.org/bullshit/) for his links again it seems.

[Edbear]

I just keep getting the message 'The requested page could not be found on the Ministry of Justice website'.


Yep, link no worky worky.

This came up on Google after putting in the question, "Whose blood was found on the rifle in the David Bain case?"

[PDF]05 Appendices_Tab A to Tab E.pdf - Ministry of Justicewww.justice.govt.nz/media/in-focus/topic.../David-Bain...A.../file‎Cached
the appellant David Cullen Bain was convicted on each of five counts of murder. ... jury, that if that jury had had the opportunity to consider the case with the benefit of that fresh .... David's bloodied fingerprints were found on the murder weapon. (3) ..... Appeal against whose decision the Board refused leave to appeal. The.

Clicking on the link brought up the PDF file.

[Drew]

This came up on Google after putting in the question, "Whose blood was found on the rifle in the David Bain case?"

[PDF]05 Appendices_Tab A to Tab E.pdf - Ministry of Justicewww.justice.govt.nz/media/in-focus/topic.../David-Bain...A.../file‎Cached
the appellant David Cullen Bain was convicted on each of five counts of murder. ... jury, that if that jury had had the opportunity to consider the case with the benefit of that fresh .... David's bloodied fingerprints were found on the murder weapon. (3) ..... Appeal against whose decision the Board refused leave to appeal. The.

Clicking on the link brought up the PDF file.

Came up empty still. But I did find this.
http://davidbain.counterspin.co.nz/evidence/davids-fingerprints-in-blood-were-found-on-the-murder-rifle

Have a read, lemme know what you think.

[Edbear]

Came up empty still. But I did find this.
http://davidbain.counterspin.co.nz/evidence/davids-fingerprints-in-blood-were-found-on-the-murder-rifle

Have a read, lemme know what you think.

Try this? I saved the file.

[Indoo]

The photos (:Police:) show residual,

So would this residue rub off or blur upon contact with any other surface? hence explaining why it wasn't visible to the pathologist?

[Katman]

Try this? I saved the file.

Well so far I'm about a fifth of the way through it and have to say, I'm not surprised that the case was referred to the Privy Council and that the subsequent retrial found him Not Guilty.

[Edbear]

Well so far I'm about a fifth of the way through it and have to say, I'm not surprised that the case was referred to the Privy Council and that the subsequent retrial found him Not Guilty.

Why am I not surprised...?

[Katman]

Why am I not surprised...?

For a start, the original jury were never made aware of Robin Bain's state of mind, and they were never made aware of the relationship between Laniet and Robin.

The bloodied sock print would more likely fit Robin's foot size than David's and the blood on the rifle which contained David's fingerprints was never even questioned as to whether it was human or animal blood.

I'm sure I'll come up with plenty more once I've read a bit more.

[Katman]

It sounds to me like the judge in the original trial had made up his mind and set about convincing the jury that David was guilty.

The series of following Appeal Hearings held in New Zealand sounds like the Court of Appeal were simply unwilling to risk undermining the performance of that original judge and jury.

[Edbear]

For a start, the original jury were never made aware of Robin Bain's state of mind, and they were never made aware of the relationship between Laniet and Robin.

The bloodied sock print would more likely fit Robin's foot size than David's and the blood on the rifle which contained David's fingerprints was never even questioned as to whether it was human or animal blood.

I'm sure I'll come up with plenty more once I've read a bit more.

All those points are addressed in the report. Nothing alters the established facts. It is all conjecture and possibilities, nothing that stands any test of proof. Points of technicalities of law, mainly.

But then you like to ignore concrete evidence for conjecture...

[Katman]

All those points are addressed in the report. Nothing alters the established facts. It is all conjecture and possibilities, nothing that stands any test of proof. Points of technicalities of law, mainly.

But then you like to ignore concrete evidence for conjecture...

Of course they're addressed in the report - that's where I got them from. :weird:

Might I remind you that David Bain was eventually found Not Guilty.

That didn't happen by accident.

[Edbear]

Of course they're addressed in the report - that's where I got them from. :weird:

Might I remind you that David Bain was eventually found Not Guilty.

That didn't happen by accident.

The Timeline.
http://www.3news.co.nz/David-Bain-timeline-of-events/tabid/423/articleID/302835/Default.aspx

http://www.3news.co.nz/David-Bain-found-not-guilty/tabid/423/articleID/107389/Default.aspx

Not guilty does not mean innocent.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10848471

[oneofsix]

The Timeline.
http://www.3news.co.nz/David-Bain-timeline-of-events/tabid/423/articleID/302835/Default.aspx

http://www.3news.co.nz/David-Bain-found-not-guilty/tabid/423/articleID/107389/Default.aspx

Not guilty does not mean innocent.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10848471

oh fuck, we are back there again. Not Guilty means he wasn't guilty, case wasn't proved so he shouldn't have been locked up. Add the review where the Justice Binnie said he was innocent and not guilty in this case does mean innocent.

[Indoo]

Not guilty does not mean innocent.

Exactly, and there is nothing unreasonable about people who agree with that verdict. There is however with people who equate it with innocence, especially given that members of the Bain jury actually contacted the media expressing their outrage that it was being construed as such.


Add the review where the Justice Binnie said he was innocent and not guilty in this case does mean innocent.

So you would prefer a report with glaringly obvious factual errors in it, to the one conducted by Sir Thomas Thorpe that concluded the opposite. At best they negate each other.

And I'd be interested in your opinion on whether the gun shot residue replicated in the T.V show would rub off or blur upon contact with another surface?

[Banditbandit]

It sounds to me like the judge in the original trial had made up his mind and set about convincing the jury that David was guilty.

The series of following Appeal Hearings held in New Zealand sounds like the Court of Appeal were simply unwilling to risk undermining the performance of that original judge and jury.


All those points are addressed in the report. Nothing alters the established facts. It is all conjecture and possibilities, nothing that stands any test of proof. Points of technicalities of law, mainly.

But then you like to ignore concrete evidence for conjecture...


Why don't you two piss off back to that other thread you came from ....

[Drew]

Well so far I'm about a fifth of the way through it and have to say, I'm not surprised that the case was referred to the Privy Council and that the subsequent retrial found him Not Guilty.

I might have made it that far at best.

It's impossible for me to read the whole thing. My eyes are stinging and dry, and I'm so bored I'm fuckin tempted to top my family and then myself!

Seemed to me that the original judge was not impartial, and swayed the jury.

But I agree with one point, that cannot be refuted. David's prints were sharp and clean, in blood, on the gun. Had they been months old at the time of initial scrutiny, they would have worn off.

He did it I think, and he did a fuckin piss poor job of hiding the fact.

[Drew]

Why don't you too piss off back to that other thread you came from ....You seem to be an educated man, use the right bloody "two" would ya.

[Katman]

So you would prefer a report with glaringly obvious factual errors in it,

And what exactly were those "glaringly obvious factual errors"?

[Edbear]

oh fuck, we are back there again. Not Guilty means he wasn't guilty, case wasn't proved so he shouldn't have been locked up. Add the review where the Justice Binnie said he was innocent and not guilty in this case does mean innocent.

Naturally you have read his reports twice amended?

[Edbear]

I might have made it that far at best.

It's impossible for me to read the whole thing. My eyes are stinging and dry, and I'm so bored I'm fuckin tempted to top my family and then myself!

Seemed to me that the original judge was not impartial, and swayed the jury.

But I agree with one point, that cannot be refuted. David's prints were sharp and clean, in blood, on the gun. Had they been months old at the time of initial scrutiny, they would have worn off.

He did it I think, and he did a fuckin piss poor job of hiding the fact.

And how did Robin do it and not leave his prints or get any blood on himself or his clothes?

[Katman]

And how did Robin do it and not leave his prints or get any blood on himself or his clothes?

Do you not think that the jury in the retrial considered that question?

[Edbear]

Do you not think that the jury in the retrial considered that question?

No jury or case reviewer has considered Robin a plausible suspect, only David's defense team has tried to put him up as an alternative to David.

[Indoo]

And what exactly were those "glaringly obvious factual errors"?

Well for starters according to Binnie the magazine next to Robins hand was empty, which makes it kind of hard for him to have marks on his thumb from reloading it now doesn't it?

[Katman]

No jury or case reviewer has considered Robin a plausible suspect, only David's defense team has tried to put him up as an alternative to David.

What is your response to paragraph 43 of Justice Binnie's report?

[Katman]

Well for starters according to Binnie the magazine next to Robins hand was empty, which makes it kind of hard for him to have marks on his thumb from reloading it now doesn't it?

So he mistakenly called it empty.

What's your response to the rest of paragraph 49(iv)?

[Edbear]

So he mistakenly called it empty.

What's your response to the rest of paragraph 49(iv)?

How could he make such an obvious mistake? You are happy to call anyone into question regarding their reliability based on any slip. He made fundamental errors yet you still prefer to believe him over everybody else.

[Indoo]

So he mistakenly called it empty.

You might have been able to dismiss it as a one off mistake if he didn't continuously refer to it as an empty magazine throughout his entire report. The key difference is he believed it was empty, which is evidence of the rigor he actually put into examining the evidence and producing his report.


What's your response to the rest of paragraph 49(iv)?

I'm assuming given the context you are referring to his comments in regards to the upright magazine? Given that he offers absolutely nothing to support his conclusion, and has already demonstrated a complete lack of understanding of the evidence in question, I'd give his comments the authority they deserve. Which is unfortunate because it is a key piece of evidence in terms of mutual exclusivity, and unless Dunedin was in the grips of a zombie apocalypse at the time, it's position physically precludes Robin from having placed it there which only leaves two other options, David placed it there or someone else did (who, why and how...).

Just watched the video of the magazine residue testing. I had assumed that after reloading the magazine each participant would then go through the process of loading a new magazine, chambered a round and then physically simulating the same handling of the rifle as Robin would have had to have done to have shot himself, to show that not only did the residue lines exist, but that they would still be clear and distinct after handling the rifle, instead they have just farcically reloaded the magazine and taken a photo immediately after. Very scientific....

[Katman]

I'm assuming given the context you are referring to his comments in regards to the upright magazine?

No, more this....

The prosecution’s own expert, who performed tests of the
“fingerprint blood” after the 1995 conviction, acknowledged that no “human
DNA” was detected.

[Katman]

Just watched the video of the magazine residue testing. I had assumed that after reloading the magazine each participant would then go through the process of loading a new magazine, chambered a round and then physically simulating the same handling of the rifle as Robin would have had to have done to have shot himself, to show that not only did the residue lines exist, but that they would still be clear and distinct after handling the rifle, instead they have just farcically reloaded the magazine and taken a photo immediately after. Very scientific....

You're a cop, aren't you?

[Erelyes]

http://www.justice.govt.nz/media/in-focus/topic-library/David-Bain-reports

is the amended link.

Katman - I presume you're referencing the 'second amended' version of Binnie's report? The paragraph numbers were changed between versions.

[scissorhands]

Hes got a point, but the reload and shoot motions, would need to be repeated dozens of times, to calculate variance of marks wiping off or remaining on the thumb

I guesstimate being on the sided of the thumb, the marks would likely remain after performing those movements

[Coldrider]

You might have been able to dismiss it as a one off mistake if he didn't continuously refer to it as an empty magazine throughout his entire report. The key difference is he believed it was empty, which is evidence of the rigor he actually put into examining the evidence and producing his report.



I'm assuming given the context you are referring to his comments in regards to the upright magazine? Given that he offers absolutely nothing to support his conclusion, and has already demonstrated a complete lack of understanding of the evidence in question, I'd give his comments the authority they deserve. Which is unfortunate because it is a key piece of evidence in terms of mutual exclusivity, and unless Dunedin was in the grips of a zombie apocalypse at the time, it's position physically precludes Robin from having placed it there which only leaves two other options, David placed it there or someone else did (who, why and how...).

Just watched the video of the magazine residue testing. I had assumed that after reloading the magazine each participant would then go through the process of loading a new magazine, chambered a round and then physically simulating the same handling of the rifle as Robin would have had to have done to have shot himself, to show that not only did the residue lines exist, but that they would still be clear and distinct after handling the rifle, instead they have just farcically reloaded the magazine and taken a photo immediately after. Very scientific....Yes you are a very smart cookie.

Were you the one that busted the Ashurst 'D'. you know the one, bound and gagged in his burning house?

[Indoo]

The prosecution’s own expert, who performed tests of the
“fingerprint blood” after the 1995 conviction, acknowledged that no “human
DNA” was detected.

If you want to resort to pointless strawman's and ad hominen attacks, you should dredge up the old thread on this subject rather than polluting this one.

Get back to me when you can come up with a coherent response to something I've actually addressed.

[Katman]

If you want to resort to pointless strawman's and ad hominen attacks, you should dredge up the old thread on this subject rather than polluting this one.

Get back to me when you can come up with a coherent response to something I've actually addressed.

You and scumdog would make a wonderful couple.

[Coldrider]

The TV3 doco adds an interesting question to the case although its not a gamebreaker IMHO. The thumbprint suggests scars not surface marks. For what its worth:



1. Full Bladder - originally this convinced me by itself. As a 50ish male it is impossible to imagine waking up and not taking a piss. Immediately. If you were nervous then you'd be up in the night and still need to urgently pee in the morning. Nevertheless a pathologist testified at the second trial that he autopsies deceased males with full bladders, so it is possible.





2. Computer message. This is a 50+ yr old man, a school teacher, in 1994, a man who grew up using a fountain pen, graduated to a ballpoint, and normally used chalk and a pencil. He murders his wife - then he murders his children whom he gave life to, and in the process has a fight with Stephen - then knowing David is due in the house any minute, he switches on the computer?? And waits for it to boot up so he can open the word processor to type a final message? Really? Would anybody here do that?


Reflecting your own health considerations onto others does not make them innocent or guilty. I too am in my fifties, I don't need a slash first thing, even before morning sex, that does not make me a rapist either. Just means some should have their prostrates checked.

Windows three wasn't that bad in its time, my boss was using it daily at the time and he was nearing retirement.