Bain, what's the answer going to be?

**Indoo** · 7th June 2009, 11:20

Originally Posted by YellowDog

Also, with all these supposed fights and struggles; where was the photographic evidence of bruising to DB's body? The prosecution didn't do a thorough job and failed to prove something that should not have been difficult to prove (unless it didn't happen as they claim).
.

There were photographs and evidence from an examination of David a doctor did a few hours after the murders. The doctor found a visible lump to his head, along with two other bruises and a graze to his knee and stated that the injuries all appeared to be fresh and would have occurred roughly before or when the murders happened. David also had no explanation for his injuries at the time when the doctor asked him but his defence later created a scenario whereby the Police or Ambulance bruised him when he fainted by dragging him. Just like the rest of his defence, it was created after trial and error many years after the fact.

The whole thing became a bit of a farce, the jury it appears was completely and utterly emotionally invested in the affair and got swept along in it losing rationality and impartiality along the way. You can see that in Michael Reeds closing address, I think most outsiders thought it a joke when he kept referring to David being a 'good boy' and such a lovely peaceful man, but he clearly read and understood that jury to the detriment of the facts and evidence.

**Genestho** · 7th June 2009, 11:45

Originally Posted by MattRSK

He wont be getting any compensation.

Wouldn't imagine so at this point.
Doesn't fit the compo criteria.
Not Guilty, is not proven innocent.

**sinned** · 7th June 2009, 22:02

How about an upset with a conflicting coroner conclusion on how Robin Bain died?

"The Dunedin coroner has said he might take another look at the Bain family's deaths, given David Bain's acquittal.
As a result, existing death certificates might be incorrect."

I just can't wait.

**smoky** · 8th June 2009, 11:12

Originally Posted by Scouse

If your lucky maybe he will let you root him seein as you care for him so much.

You have a fixation with homo's don't you? You should buy a Honda
All the red rep from you on my profile; talking about cock sucking?

You lack any ability to discuss issues without getting all uptight and abusing people, getting personal for some reason.
Do you like me so much, you seem obsessed with making sexual comments to me?

**Swoop** · 8th June 2009, 13:09

Originally Posted by ynot slow

The biggest criminal act there were the QC charging out at $160hour...

A QC charging only $160-??
BARGAIN!!

**ManDownUnder** · 8th June 2009, 13:15

I've cracked it - it was Lee Harvey Oswold's original plan, and it was Professor Plum in the Bathroom with the magic plumber's mate from the grassy knoll

So obvious now I put all the pieces together...

**p.dath** · 8th June 2009, 13:19

Originally Posted by Swoop

A QC charging only $160-??
BARGAIN!!

I agree. Even barristors charge more than that. QC's tend to be more like $450/hour and up.

I suspect the cheap rate might be because of the publicity and fame gained. What a great promotion for the QC concerned. Either that or they felt sympathy for Mr Bain.
What am I saying, it was a lawyer. They were doing it for personal gain.

**marty** · 8th June 2009, 19:41

how about joe karam, after spending the last 13-odd years in the media saying 'the first jury got it wrong, how could they only spend 7 hours deliberating, it was a foregone conclusion' etc, has the nerve to go on TV tonight complaining that the media is not respecting the findings of the jury?

Typical of the defence's way of chosing only information to make their client look good

**Skyryder** · 8th June 2009, 20:20

Originally Posted by ManDownUnder

I've cracked it - it was Lee Harvey Oswold's original plan, and it was Professor Plum in the Bathroom with the magic plumber's mate from the grassy knoll

So obvious now I put all the pieces together...

And come to the conclusion that it was the SITH

Skyryder

**Hitcher** · 8th June 2009, 20:23

Originally Posted by marty

Typical of the defence's way of chosing only information to make their client look good

Have you not heard of the adversarial justice system? The prosecution does what ever is necessary to make the defendant look bad and the defense does everything it can to make them look good. It's nonsense and nothing to do with "justice".

I much prefer the coronial enquiry system where the Coroner can direct proceedings, seek whatever information or evidence they feel necessary, and directly question witnesses.

**Swoop** · 8th June 2009, 20:27

I wondered about the amount of time spent deliberating. However...
A jury tends to make their minds up during the case itself. Once the jury goes out, there will be an amount of time to find out who has formed a decision, then finding out "what" decision everyone has come to.
Then working towards a unanimous verdict, one way or the other.

This jury had spent considerable time being exposed to the evidence and argument and, I presume, managed to form their own opinions well ahead of time.

**mynameis** · 8th June 2009, 23:18

10 Fucken Char

**short-circuit** · 9th June 2009, 08:53

Just saw the promo for an interview on Campbell Live tonight with Joe Karam saying he "couldn't have fought against this evil without David"

WTF!!!

**marty** · 9th June 2009, 09:07

Originally Posted by Hitcher

Have you not heard of the adversarial justice system? The prosecution does what ever is necessary to make the defendant look bad and the defense does everything it can to make them look good. It's nonsense and nothing to do with "justice".

I much prefer the coronial enquiry system where the Coroner can direct proceedings, seek whatever information or evidence they feel necessary, and directly question witnesses.

I'm pretty well versed in the shortcomings of the current system, however what really grates me is that the Police are obliged to disclose everything, the defence can pick and choose what they use, and they can surprise the court with what/whomever they choose.

The coronial system, pretty much like the one employed by the military and certainly by the SFO when it existed, would be good, but it would never pass the 'Green' test

**MIXONE** · 9th June 2009, 09:11

Originally Posted by p.dath

I agree. Even barristors charge more than that. QC's tend to be more like $450/hour and up.

I suspect the cheap rate might be because of the publicity and fame gained. What a great promotion for the QC concerned. Either that or they felt sympathy for Mr Bain.
What am I saying, it was a lawyer. They were doing it for personal gain.

The maximum amount chargeable on Legal Aid by a lawyer is $160 per hour for I think a maximum of 15 hours.