From anonymous:

Anonymous said...
Why hasn't all this been in the papers too? Why have they reported all the trash against David, with TV interviews of people who didn't even give evidence, but not the people who did give evidence but had it ruled inadmissible like the evidence about Arawa? I feel manipulated.

August 6, 2010 4:10 PM

Well, we have been manipulated.

The sorrowful thing about the Laws debate is that he was unable to react to the evidence in any meaningful way. I was left with the impression that he wasn't interested in any detail because his mind was already made up, uninformed that he was. I think something as serious as the Bain case warranted a different kind of forum, and probably one that wasn't adversative. Had Law reacted less defensively the public would have had a great opportunity to transverse the evidence in greater detail because it was clear that Karam had the transcript with him and was able to refer to the direct evidence and not something dreamed up in the small hours by a desperate twisted sister. For the benefit of listeners Laws should have raised misconceptions and accepted from the evidence the answers.

I enjoyed the short shift the dreamer who rang up about the content's of Karam's book and that of McNeish's and quoted evidence that didn't exist about Stephen waking to find David 'rehearsing' the murders. I suspect it was kent Parker wearing a mask and fishnets.

I maintain reservations of the a situation that is similar to trial by media, however, that there was at least one informed party present was a consolation and I note that the trial by media began with the fellow who made similar mistakes and poor assumptions in the Peter Ellis case.