sharetrader
Page 1 of 132 123451151101 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 1971
  1. #1
    kirky
    Guest

    Default No compensation for Bain and Karam

    Around 70% of people posting on the Bain case thread think David Bain killed his family, the case is now over but the fight led by Karam for more of your hard earned tax dollars in compensation to be awarded to David the most likely killer and David's business partner Karam, has begun.

    I personally will be making hopefully a powerful and informed argument against compo to Simon Power the minister of justice, although we have heard that David may be unlikely to be able to get compo, the government just loves giving away your tax dollars so that may happen anyway. What I am looking for here is some good argument from other posters opposing wasting of public funds in this way. The travisty of a killer escaping justice is bad enough geting paid our hard earned tax money in compo is unbearable.

    Below is a tiny portion of the argument I will be sending to Simon Power.

    If Robin Bain shot his family what would he have had to do?
    David’s testimony is that he left the house at 5.45am to do his paper round he arrived back home by his own admission just after 6.40 lets say 6.42 that gives Robin 57 minutes, first of all Robin would have had to have been watching from the caravan where he had been sleeping for David to be departing from the house for the paper run, problems arise straight away with this scenario, as Alister McConnell, managing director of distribution for the Otago Daily Times at the time, told police he would drop off bundles of papers for David to deliver, but sometimes had to wake him up when he didn't turn up to do his run and sometimes Robin Bain or David's sister Laniet would do the round for him, Mr. McConnell said. So if Robin had planned to kill the whole family that morning it would have hinged on David not sleeping in. Robin must have been listening to the radio because the police found it still blaring when they entered the caravan later; Robin had a watch and an alarm clock that was set for 6.30am so the radio was not necessary for waking. Testimony at court showed David was pretty erratic with his paper run, sleeping in etc, so David has left, Robin now makes his move into the house presumably with his shoes on, he goes quietly into David’s room and somehow finds the spare key for the trigger lock, “David testified that only he knew where the spare key was kept” the other key for some reason David kept on a string around his neck, but the day before David and Steven and with Dad watching participated in a mid winter swim, David gave the key to Robin and Robin put it in his Jacket pocket the jacket was found by the police with the key still in the pocket in Robins caravan. But Robin doesn't use this key he finds the spare key in David’s room in a jar on the dressing table he then gets the 22 rifle and ammo out of David’s wardrobe unlocks the trigger lock and leaves it on the floor with a few 22 rounds, he then looks for and finds David’s opera gloves in a drawer puts them on and then presumably takes off his shoes as the bloody prints found later were made with sock clad feet, he then walks down the hall turns left and enters Laniet’s room, first shot to her is probably through her cheek then she is shot above her left ear and the third shot to the top of her head, Robin then exits Laniet’s room and enters Margaret’s room on the other side of the hall, she to is asleep in her bed he shoots her in the eye and then walks next door to 14 year old Stevens room, based on what we know the killer Robin in this version of events raises the rifle to shoot Steven in the head but Steven wakes and puts his hand up and grabs the silencer at the end of the rifle barrel leaving fingerprints there but Robin shoots at the same time the slug goes through Stevens hand and grazes his head, he starts to bleed profusely as the fight for his young life begins, the killer and Steven wrestle from one side of the room to the other, there is blood going everywhere and at one stage Steven is forced hard against the handles of a set of drawers, we know this because the pathologist found indentations on his back matching the shape of these handles, eventually the killer strangles Steven with his own T shirt incapacitates him and attempts to shoot him but at this stage the gun jams as it was prone to do so Robin is forced to take off David’s opera gloves to dislodge the jammed round, the gloves drenched with blood are later found by police under Stevens bed, another round is then fired into Stevens head finishing him off, Robin now covered in blood exits Stevens room bumping into and leaving blood on the door frame, down the hall he goes he then turns right down the stairs, at the bottom of the stairs he turns right again and walks into Arawa’s door way also bumping into the door frame and leaving blood stains there, Arawa is up she was probably awoken from the commotion upstairs, Robin fires at close range but misses Arawa, the slug recovered later in the wall, the next shot hits her forehead just above the right eye, she is later found slumped backwards with her legs folded beneath her, so that is all the family killed except for David who is on the paper run, if Robin is the killer he now has to wash the blood off his hands, but testimony from the trial is that there was dirt in the creases of his hands so the washing of his hands was unlikely, he now has to remove all his blood splattered clothes because when the police find him later shot dead he only has his own blood on his clothing. Robin walks down the passage and enters the laundry he removes his bloodied clothing and puts it into the clothes basket, Michael Reed David’s lawyer at trial said Robin changed into completely blood free clothes to meet his maker, so bearing that in mind, to meet his maker, he chose an old pair of light-blue tracksuit pants, an equally dilapidated T-shirt, an old business shirt, a brown woolen jersey and a thick hoodie he also donned a green knitted beanie and put on clean socks and shoes, but no underpants. This clothing looks more like the gear one would put on for a freezing winters day rather than what you would wear to meet your maker, he then heads for the lounge at the front of the house, his normal routine in the mornings was to bring in the newspaper “not delivered by David but another paper boy” and leave it on the hall sideboard to read after he prays in the front lounge room this morning is no different as the police later find the Otago Daily times paper dated 20th June 1994 in the hall, so an odd thing for someone who’s “going to commit murder, suicide, also very strange to wear gloves as gloves are only worn in cases like these to avoid leaving fingerprints and hide ones identity when you are committing an offense "What on earth are the gloves for if you're going to commit murder then suicide and tell the world David is the only one who deserves to stay” Crown prosecutor Mr. Raftery asked the court at trial. So Robin now enters the lounge, it is very dark at this time so presumably he turns on the light and goes into the computer alcove in the lounge where he turns on the computer somewhere between 6.40 and 6.45 he waits at least another 40 seconds for the old computer to boot up with some appropriate word program, he then types in the words “SORRY YOU ARE THE ONLY ONE WHO DESERVED TO STAY” he then goes through the curtains grabs the rifle again and shoots himself in the left temple even though he is right handed “the statistics for this method with a rifle when you are right handed are extremely unsupported” he falls down beside the been bag and when he is found there is a ten shot magazine standing on its thin edge near his right hand, the measurements of this magazine were; [average length is about 77mm and its average height about 28mm. Its width is just a little over 8mm.The narrow width of the magazine makes the fact that it ended up on its edge very strange, the more so because of the convex nature of the edge on which it came to rest. Its convex shape results in the edge’s bearing surface being significantly reduced, experiments later were to show the odds of a magazine landing on its edge after being dropped were zero, but if you believe that David was the killer who held this spare 10 shot magazine then maybe he planted it beside his fathers outstretched hand to reinforce the suicide scenario. There was another magazine in the rifle and it obviously would have contained the fatal bullet. Two more live rounds were left in that magazine.
    At the post mortem Dr Dempster found that Robin’s bladder contained about 400ml of dark, relatively concentrated urine. He regarded that as a normal overnight collection, saying that it was “the amount an individual would pass on getting up in the morning”. A curious feature of the case is that Robin had not passed this urine on getting up in the morning, and if Robin was the killer this means he would have been up even before David left on the paper run at 5.45 and of course we know because of the computer turn on time at approximately 6.43 that this scenario means that Robin held off going to the toilet for quite some time at least an hour. Whereas if David was the killer of Robin and the one who turned on the computer at approximately 6.43 with Robin entering the lounge at his usual time just before 7am after waking and walking from the caravan, then it is more understandably why he was found with a full bladder simply because he would have only have been up for a short while. If we are to say Robin committed suicide another question one could look at would be why did he go to the lounge to do it, if David shot him he has a reason for being in the lounge as it was stated by at least two people that he always went there first thing in the morning to pray, but if as the defense says he shot himself, then obviously there was no reason to shoot himself in the lounge.

  2. #2
    Member Yossarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    202

    Default

    my suggestions is use more paragraphs.

    Also I'm not sure there's a lot of point in going over the minutiae of the case again - Power will (I imagine) accept the jury's verdict, and therefore David's innocence, before he even starts.

  3. #3
    Legend shasta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Wellington
    Posts
    6,639

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Hall View Post
    The solution to the compensation of David Bain is simple. Joe Karam has now pronounced that David Bain is innocent not only beyond reasonable doubt, but on the balance of probabilities. So as honest Joe wouldn't lie to us, since he has pronounced, it is up to Joe Karam to determine a suitable level of compensation for Bain fils and for Joe Karam to pay that compensation, on behalf of all of us.
    Problem solved!
    Joe will need some seed funding to get his next book published.

    Wouldn't David (who is currently travelling around the UK) have to be here to make his case for the compensation?

    I hope he doesn't get any taxpayer funded compensation, but perhaps he should be allowed his inheritance/whatever funds are left over.

    I'm not usually a fence sitter - but this case is a one of a kind!
    Disc holding - BIN, JKL, NMT, TLM, URB, WSA

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    , , .
    Posts
    3,408

    Default

    DB has been shunted out of the country because he's got a short fuse and a big mouth and is liable to prejudice his case if he opens it and says what really happened.
    Anyone who kills that number of people shouldn't do 13 years they should do closer to 100 years.
    You can bet your life there are those in high places who reckon he did it too, so it's not going to be easy.
    This is one of the few times in my life I feel like donating some cash-to stop DB getting compensation.

  5. #5
    Muppet Placebo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Lower Hutt, , New Zealand.
    Posts
    481

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yossarian View Post
    my suggestions is use more paragraphs.

    Also I'm not sure there's a lot of point in going over the minutiae of the case again - Power will (I imagine) accept the jury's verdict, and therefore David's innocence, before he even starts.
    Correct. You need to argue the legal basis for compensating or not compensating. Not try to re-litigate the case. That ship has sailed, Kirky. Get. Over. It.

    There are a few things you need to know.

    Firstly, when you write to a Minister, the Minister doesn't pick up his crayon and respond to you himself. He (or rather his staff) passes it on to the relevant department (in this case Justice), who will compose a reply. The Minister may or may not read the reply before signing it out. Most Ministers, to be fair, read them. But don't bank on it.

    Bureaucrats aren't silly. They can spot madcap ranting crusaders a mile off. And you, Kirky, are a madcap ranting crusader. So the first thing you need to do is tone down your emotional involvement. Present cogent, rational arguments. In fact, before you even start to write, you need to think `what am I wanting to achieve? What points do I want to make? How can I concisely present my arguments to best effect?

    Then write.

    Then edit

    Then give it to someone else you trust to tell you what they think of it.

    Then edit it again.

    Then send it.

    What you have posted here would be counter-productive to your cause.
    Marriage isn't a word. It's a sentence

  6. #6
    kirky
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yossarian View Post
    my suggestions is use more paragraphs.

    Also I'm not sure there's a lot of point in going over the minutiae of the case again - Power will (I imagine) accept the jury's verdict, and therefore David's innocence, before he even starts.
    Yossarian the first thing you have to understand is if you are found not guilty in a court of law it does not mean that you are innocent.

  7. #7
    kirky
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by belgarion View Post
    As you're convinced he's guilty - how can you say he "escaped justice" given the number of years he spent in prison?
    OK maybe he didn't escape justice completely but 13 years for 5 murders is a little light in my book 100 years is getting closer to the mark.

  8. #8
    kirky
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Skol View Post
    DB has been shunted out of the country because he's got a short fuse and a big mouth and is liable to prejudice his case if he opens it and says what really happened.
    Anyone who kills that number of people shouldn't do 13 years they should do closer to 100 years.
    You can bet your life there are those in high places who reckon he did it too, so it's not going to be easy.
    This is one of the few times in my life I feel like donating some cash-to stop DB getting compensation.
    Well said Skol I think you are probably right about him being shunted out of the country, I really can't see Bain living in NZ after this trial with every second person he meets looking at him with suspicion, and as there being people in high places who think David did it you can bet your bottom dollar on that at least 50% of people think he did it! his support now is less than before the trial many people were truly stunned at the outcome of the trial given the evidence against David and the almost complete lack of evidence implicating Robin.

  9. #9
    Legend shasta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Wellington
    Posts
    6,639

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kirky View Post
    Yossarian the first thing you have to understand is if you are found not guilty in a court of law it does not mean that you are innocent.
    Kirky

    Take a deep breath!

    The DB case is kind of like the OJ case (ok, there are a few similarities)

    Found Not Guilty* of the Murders in court, then found guilty of being involved in there deaths in a civil case & was sued.

    Clearly the US laws that allow that do not operate here, but the issue of compensation for DB (like OJ) seems to bare no relation to the outcome of the original case.

    * He's since gone & robbed someone & is back in jail
    Disc holding - BIN, JKL, NMT, TLM, URB, WSA

  10. #10
    kirky
    Guest

    Default

    [QUOTE=Placebo;270480]Correct.
    You need to argue the legal basis for compensating or not compensating. Not try to re-litigate the case. That ship has sailed, Kirky. Get. Over. It.
    Placebo I am not re-litigating the case simply calling for ideas from people to stop Bain and his business partner getting more money, if I are to send a protest to the minister of justice I need to put something in print the bit about Robin Bain is not fantasy it is what he would have to have done to be the killer and is based on the accepted facts of the case by the defence and the prosecution, and I think if you read it as I hope other people including the minister do it will help to demonstrate just how implausible it was for Robin to be the culprit.

    There are a few things you need to know.

    Firstly, when you write to a Minister, the Minister doesn't pick up his crayon and respond to you himself. He (or rather his staff) passes it on to the relevant department (in this case Justice), who will compose a reply. The Minister may or may not read the reply before signing it out. Most Ministers, to be fair, read them. But don't bank on it.
    So what makes you think you are the only one who understands how things work, I am well aware of what you are saying here and I know I am probably fighting an uphill battle but sometimes people in high places do listen yes sometimes we can make a difference.

    Bureaucrats aren't silly. They can spot madcap ranting crusaders a mile off. And you, Kirky, are a madcap ranting crusader. So the first thing you need to do is tone down your emotional involvement. Present cogent, rational arguments.
    I am passionate about this issue but there is no need to start name calling Placebo you are not in the school playground now And as for Presenting cogent, rational argument what part of my post about Robin Bain is not cogent or rational.

    What you have posted here would be counter-productive to your cause.
    Why is that Placebo, I think it quite clearly shows how very improbable it would have been for Robin to do the crime.

  11. #11
    kirky
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Hall View Post
    The inheritance issue seems legally the more interesting issue. He was found not guilty so obviously he should be in line tio inherit. But his relatives received the money in good faith and may not be in a position to repay even if they are obliged to.
    .
    Yes it is interesting and I can not shed any legal light on what the law says in regard to Bain now getting his inheritance, but I know for sure knowing what his relatives especially the uncles and aunties know I think they will be fighting tooth and nail to stop David from profiting from crime.

  12. #12
    kirky
    Guest

    Default

    shasta; Kirky

    Take a deep breath!
    Done That ' Ah thats better

    The DB case is kind of like the OJ case (ok, there are a few similarities)

    Found Not Guilty* of the Murders in court, then found guilty of being involved in there deaths in a civil case & was sued.

    Clearly the US laws that allow that do not operate here, but the issue of compensation for DB (like OJ) seems to bare no relation to the outcome of the original case.
    Most of the legal experts in the news media seem to think that David will be fighting an uphill battle to receive compo as the level of proof is much higher than convincing some weak minded jurors. All I am trying to do is help in some small way.
    Last edited by kirky; 25-08-2009 at 03:30 PM.

  13. #13
    Guru minimoke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Christchurch, New Zealand.
    Posts
    3,490

    Default

    [quote=kirky;270534]
    Quote Originally Posted by Placebo View Post
    And as for Presenting cogent, rational argument what part of my post about Robin Bain is not cogent or rational.
    Kirky, I hate to burst your bubble but when the Ministers staff recieve your no doubt larger submission they will be reaching for the "Nutcase Response" template letter.

    If you are looking for feedback on your post I'm afraid you lost me on the first paragraph - there were hints of irrationality there all ready. As for cogent argument - there is none if you are relying on the views of posters on a sharetrading forum.

    In addition to Palcebo's useful advice I might add trying to get your letter to one page, perhaps two. The use of paragraphs is obviously essential but some bullet points are also an attractive way of making a point quickly. Rather than dwelling on the case you might want to be researching the Cabinet manual and how a request by DB will be handled - this way you can express your view on how that decison should be made along with supporting evidence. Your evidnce probably needs to be on compensation precedent rather Bains trial. Ministers do quite like being alerted to "unintended consequences" so you might like to consider what these might be and bring them to the Ministers attention. Cabinet advisors will be doing this so you're probably going to have to be a bit creative

    You're also probably going to need a Plan "B". If Plan A suceeds and Bain doesn't get compo you'll sleep easy at night knowing you did your bit. But if Bain does get compo you are going to need your backup plan.

  14. #14
    Senior Member Nita's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , , .
    Posts
    1,005

    Default

    Kirky. Yes mentioned 70% of pposters on here found him guilty. The most important thing is that 100% of the jury found him not guilty. also just under half the kiwi population also beleive he is not guilty. based on those stats alone it is clear that there are some things are a miss. either the prosecution did a terrible job or the defense did a wonderful job or a bit of both.

    ps. i could read the first post as it was too long and no paragraphs. But i do enjoy your enthusiasm and whatever happens i hope some good comes out of it.

    On a slightly different note, my biggest gripe with the justice system is allowing convicted criminals get away with blue murder (excuse the pun). We need to simplify the prison system especially for life sentences (and make them life) and let criminals understand that there is a strong deterrent from commiting crime. We are too soft here in NZ

  15. #15
    kirky
    Guest

    Default

    [QUOTE=minimoke;270544][quote=kirky;270534]
    Kirky, I hate to burst your bubble but when the Ministers staff receive your no doubt larger submission they will be reaching for the "Nutcase Response" template letter.
    Ok MM I am trying to be fair here, my posting is going to be just a part of a submission, you have said they will be reaching for the "Nutcase Response" template letter, you have made this comment, can you go on and tell me why this small part of my submission would bring on a "Nutcase Response" as you put it.
    If you are looking for feedback on your post I'm afraid you lost me on the first paragraph - there were hints of irrationality there all ready.
    Again can you tell me what those hints were.
    As for cogent argument - there is none if you are relying on the views of posters on a sharetrading forum.
    Well in your case you may well be right but really I think the posters on the Bain tread yourself included are better qualified than most average kiwies, several posters were attending the trial regularly and the knowledge of the facts and evidence of the case is of quite a high standard which is why I believe 70% of the posters believe David is guilty, and no doubt don't want to waste further tax money on him with 50% going to his partner Karam.
    I might add trying to get your letter to one page, perhaps two. The use of paragraphs is obviously essential but some bullet points are also an attractive way of making a point quickly. Rather than dwelling on the case you might want to be researching the Cabinet manual and how a request by DB will be handled - this way you can express your view on how that decision should be made along with supporting evidence. Your evidence probably needs to be on compensation precedent rather Bains trial. Ministers do quite like being alerted to "unintended consequences" so you might like to consider what these might be and bring them to the Ministers attention. Cabinet advisers will be doing this so you're probably going to have to be a bit creative
    Thanks for that I will bear that in mind, my post is a bit rough IE no paragraphs etc but it will look better when I have finished with it having said that I think the post is preety logical and it is designed to show the implausibility of Robin being the killer.
    You're also probably going to need a Plan "B". If Plan A succeeds and Bain doesn't get compo you'll sleep easy at night knowing you did your bit. But if Bain does get compo you are going to need your backup plan.
    Plan B is "I still own a 22 MM".

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •