David Bain vs The Crown - game over

[Crasherfromwayback]

. That dictionary defined evidence as proof of fact. *If* Robin didn't do it is a fact..

Therin lies your probleem Ed. *IF* Robin didn't do it. We have no *Proof* whatsoever to *Prove* he didn't. Hence...it's not a *fact* he didn't. Get it now?

[Katman]

If Robin didn't do it is a fact.

Ed, that sentence doesn't even make any sense.

Was that Maha's hand up your arse?

[Drew]

I have done all I can, to turn this thread into something entertaining for everyone. But it seems to have been in vane, I am a failure

[Crasherfromwayback]

I have done all I can, to turn this thread into something entertaining for everyone. But it seems to have been in vane, I am a failure

Vain Old Boy.

[Drew]

Vain Old Boy.

Dammit...

[Madness]

I am a failure.

Actually I thought the bit about splitting atoms in your kitchen with household chemicals was mildly amusing, if not ridiculously stupid.

[Edbear]

Therin lies your probleem Ed. *IF* Robin didn't do it. We have no *Proof* whatsoever to *Prove* he didn't. Hence...it's not a *fact* he didn't. Get it now?

The evidence that is conclusive is that no blood from any of the victims was on Robin or his clothing. Not possible in the circumstances if he was the killer. No gunpowder residue was on him, also not possible were he the killer. No evidence of any kind to allow him to have been in any of the victims rooms. Not possible were he the killer. His prints were not on the rifle. If he was the last person to have used it, the number of shots fired and the variety of angles and holds would have left clear prints in several areas of the weapon and the magazines. These are facts that specifically clear Robin Bain and prove his innocence, ergo, it is a fact that Robin did not do it.

No other evidence is even required and there is no evidence of any kind pointing to him. The above automatically negates any speculation and conjecture, which is all the defence had anyway.

I have done all I can, to turn this thread into something entertaining for everyone. But it seems to have been in vane, I am a failure

I think you mean vain...

[Mushu]

Not even the judges or juries who heard all of the evidence ever considered Robin a likely suspect. And as has been brought out, the jurors who found the not guilty verdict, did not consider David innocent.

David would not still be in prison, having served his sentnce. All this is in retrospect.

What was this incontrovertible evidence and how did I, Justice Binnie, the privy council and David Bains defence all miss it? How is it retrospect, did this evidence of yours come to light after the trial? I must have missed that episode of 3rd degree

Also the sentence quoted above by katman and crasher makes no sense, it's not fact until it is proven.

[Katman]

His prints were not on the rifle.

There were many prints on the rifle that were unidentifiable.

That does not mean that none were Robin's.

[Crasherfromwayback]

Blah blah blah blah. Wank wank wank wank. And I still don't know what the words *fact* or *Hypocrisy* mean. Wank wank wank Blah blah blah

That's better.

it's not fact until it is proven.

You may note, I have in *fact*, been doing my best to explain this to Ed, but it would appear he perhaps has 'one wheel in the sand' and perhaps even his head up his arse.

[Madness]

No gunpowder residue was on him, also not possible were he the killer.

The Luminol tests performed on Robin Bain were ruled inadmissible due to the popo not following established crime scene procedure of covering the hands in plastic. There could well have been gunpowder residue present but due to the popo incompetence we'll never know.

Fail.

[Mushu]

The evidence that is conclusive is that no blood from any of the victims was on Robin or his clothing. Not possible in the circumstances if he was the killer. No gunpowder residue was on him, also not possible were he the killer. No evidence of any kind to allow him to have been in any of the victims rooms. Not possible were he the killer. His prints were not on the rifle. If he was the last person to have used it, the number of shots fired and the variety of angles and holds would have left clear prints in several areas of the weapon and the magazines. These are facts that specifically clear Robin Bain and prove his innocence, ergo, it is a fact that Robin did not do it.

No other evidence is even required and there is no evidence of any kind pointing to him. The above automatically negates any speculation and conjecture, which is all the defence had anyway.



I think you mean vain...

The clothes worn during the murders were in the wash. Which poses the question if it were David why would he have blood on him later and why did he not clean up the blood in the laundry

GSR tests were not done at the scene and residue was not found on David either

There were fingerprints on the rifle not up to the standard to be tested, and we can be pretty sure Robin had had his hands on that gun at some stage whether he did it or not (20 rounds in his caravan). Also bloody gloves in Stephens room suggest that whoever did it wore gloves until that point.

Hardly incontrovertible proof there Ed.

[Mushu]

You may note, I have in *fact*, been doing my best to explain this to Ed, but it would appear he perhaps has 'one wheel in the sand' and perhaps even his head up his arse.

Agreed, but you have to admit without Ed KB wouldn't be anywhere near as fun.

[Madness]

I wonder if Ed's been double-dipping on the Tramadol lately?

[Crasherfromwayback]

you have to admit without Ed KB wouldn't be anywhere near as fun.

In my opinion...that is also a *fact*.