A spokesman for Mr Power said today the case was a police matter and Government ministers could not get involved.
"Police are the only ones to investigate guilt and innocence," he told NZPA.
A 2009 report into whether Mr Power should have established a commission of inquiry into the Peter Ellis case said it would be unconstitutional for him to do so.
"The constitutional implications of establishing a commission of inquiry... would go beyond the constitutionally recognised function of the executive and encroach directly on the authority and function of the courts."
It said if an inquiry was set up to look at the Ellis case it would be unique and set a precedent for future cases.
Former Christchurch child care worker Peter Ellis was found guilty in June 1993 on 16 counts of sexual offences involving children in his care at a creche and was sentenced to 10 years' jail.
The case was subject to two Court of Appeal hearings and a ministerial inquiry. The convictions have remained despite widespread support for Ellis, who has always maintained his innocence. When Mr Power turned down the call for a commission of inquiry, he said Ellis' outstanding right to seek leave to appeal to the Privy Council meant the request for an inquiry should be declined.
I think from the short piece above Simon Power has got it wrong from the outset and seems to be floundering to grasp even basic policing and constitutional rights. He starts, "Police are the only ones to investigate guilt and innocence," he told NZPA. I may be mistaken but I thought the police investigated and searched for evidence which in turn, if satisfied warrants charges to be laid, they laid informations in the Courts which are accusations of which they believe they have the evidence to prove (on the face of it) an individual to be guilty of a particular crime. That said, the Jury decide guilt and evidence having heard all the admissible evidence - tested in most cases by cross-examination and counter evidence, not the police. By this reasoning from the Minister the role of a Jury has no place in the administration of Justice.
He then goes onto compromise what perhaps may be a pending decision in the Bain case of having a QC re-examine the evidence after a Jury Trial.. "The constitutional implications of establishing a commission of inquiry... would go beyond the constitutionally recognised function of the executive and encroach directly on the authority and function of the courts."He says speaking about the Peter Ellis and case apparently not seeing the significance in the Cabinet 'right' to appoint a QC to investigate guilt on 'the balance of probabilities.' If one is unconstitutional then so is the other.
In another breath he recognises our Highest Court of the time, the Privy Council, pointing out that because Ellis has yet to try (indeed if one could even feel an innocent man, must jump the hurdles of his captor) to take his case before the Privy Council. This while at the same time having presented that the PC isn't (or wasn't at the time our highest court) able to make rulings that might not be subject to executive interference which will be the case if Power does uphold an 'executive' power over a Judicial decision that an 'actual substantial miscarriage of justice has occurred.'
Putting these inconsistencies in context, as well as the Public Interest, Power seems to have made a grave mistake and one at odds with his conflicting statements about judicial independence and the executive power trying to usurp it. I hope Rochelle has the resources and help to consider a Judicial Review of this decision made by the Executive and attended by what appears (at least by news reports) to be conflicting and inconsistent logic.
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
Trevor William Fox, known as luckytrader, a Christchurch internet trader, stalker and kiddie fiddler supporter has a question...
When does Milton Weirs book on the case come out? He knows more about the case than anyone, and it will be interesting to see if he has formed an opinion about the events.
Quotelucky_trader (1258 )
Milton Weir's book is shelved, unwanted just like you arsew...Unfortunately he knows very little about the case but a lot about the Miscarriage of Justice, however his attempts to write a book to this point wouldn't be of any interest to anyone because his efforts so far, as I understand it, have focused on his own sorry butt and people want to know the truth as to the role he and others played in enhancing evidence and failing to investigate Robin Bain in any meaningful way. Of course you have a 'soft' spot for old Millie don't you? Why don't you tell us what your connection to him is, also your connection to the ChCh press and the Jury stalking, tell us something meaningful, spill the beans it will make you feel better now that we all know who you are and most of your dirty secrets. But don't be disappointed about the failure of Milton's book to be worthy of publication as once the inquiries are over and the case heard in the High Court you'll be in a book yourself under the heading Trevor Fiddler.
Quotelucky_trader (1258 )
Milton Weir's book is shelved, unwanted just like you arsew...Unfortunately he knows very little about the case but a lot about the Miscarriage of Justice, however his attempts to write a book to this point wouldn't be of any interest to anyone because his efforts so far, as I understand it, have focused on his own sorry butt and people want to know the truth as to the role he and others played in enhancing evidence and failing to investigate Robin Bain in any meaningful way. Of course you have a 'soft' spot for old Millie don't you? Why don't you tell us what your connection to him is, also your connection to the ChCh press and the Jury stalking, tell us something meaningful, spill the beans it will make you feel better now that we all know who you are and most of your dirty secrets. But don't be disappointed about the failure of Milton's book to be worthy of publication as once the inquiries are over and the case heard in the High Court you'll be in a book yourself under the heading Trevor Fiddler.
Sunday, November 28, 2010
Cowgirljo
Agreed.
Theres always a few who will spoil it for the majority, with personal insults and inuendos - instead of contributing to the discussion at hand. I continue to read however now am reluctant to post due to inappropriate comments from some posters.
Quotecowgirljo (183 ) 7:57 am, Sun 28 Nov #30863
Cowgirljo can't cop what she dishes out, how terrible for her. I wonder if in cowgirljo's vacant mind she is able to connect that persecuting David Bain for a case that cowgirljo has never read except for the biased lies of hate-sites is 'inappropriate comments.' I wonder if she could even begin to comprehend that it is greater than a 'personal' insult (that she laments has happened to her) for a man freed by a jury of his peers after a living nightmare to be called a murderer by idiots like cowgirljo, Rachael Membery and others, or to see lists of lies posted by William Rodie incessantly in an effort to make the lies the truth. F... you cowgirljo and f... your hate-site mongrels.
Theres always a few who will spoil it for the majority, with personal insults and inuendos - instead of contributing to the discussion at hand. I continue to read however now am reluctant to post due to inappropriate comments from some posters.
Quotecowgirljo (183 ) 7:57 am, Sun 28 Nov #30863
Cowgirljo can't cop what she dishes out, how terrible for her. I wonder if in cowgirljo's vacant mind she is able to connect that persecuting David Bain for a case that cowgirljo has never read except for the biased lies of hate-sites is 'inappropriate comments.' I wonder if she could even begin to comprehend that it is greater than a 'personal' insult (that she laments has happened to her) for a man freed by a jury of his peers after a living nightmare to be called a murderer by idiots like cowgirljo, Rachael Membery and others, or to see lists of lies posted by William Rodie incessantly in an effort to make the lies the truth. F... you cowgirljo and f... your hate-site mongrels.
Melanie White wrote a confession.....
Sweetad as she calls herself would so love to be popular and not left out, even when she attempted to pull at heart strings for a remembrance day for the Bain family no one turned up, not even her old classmates whom she claimed were with her in the same class as the maligned (by the hate-sites) victim Laniet Bain. But of course one could think that there is no harm in such a manufactured event when one realises it was manufactured for the ego of Melanie White who even (by their absence) her hate-site buddies didn't bother showing up to support either, perhaps because Melanie had invited the Press causing the fear that real faces and identities would become known. In fact it would all be a bit sad except that Melanie deserves no sympathy because she is a message board stalker as well as deluded nutcase, captured for all time in cyberspace stalking other board users and their families, an event I guess that makes her little different to the run of the mill hate-siter, all par for the course. But Melanie was onto something big, her moment in the sun, she wrote (what she claimed) was a confession from her 'dearest friend' Laniet Bain (ironically, probably the 3rd most attacked person on the hate-sites) that laid the allegations of incest at someone other than dear daddy's feet. Of course the rabid hate-siters embraced it without question and shifted the 'jewel' to the inner sanctums of the secret site, of course like most things they do keeping it secure was a failure and it leaked. I won't go into any specific detail about the alleged 'confession' but broadly speaking you'd have to be a fully qualified idiot to believe it for a minute, let alone take it seriously. In the first instance it was never taken to the Police, or at least as far as I know, because it was the rambling of an idiot (Melanie White.) She bestowed acute worldly knowledge on the 'author' who was supposed to be a child. The author was able to second guess and read things, once in full stride the author (Melanie) was 'rescuing' Laniet, taking her somewhere safe where Laniet was taken in by parents who oddly enough considered taking in someone else's child was quite normal as it was also quite normal not to let the child's parents know or even the Police. The story depending on the child's parents also being complicit and not going to the police or school to find out what had happened to their missing daughter. It was in short, much like Melanie White, stalker and liar - reality overstretched to farce.
Melanie is incapable of understanding the harm she does to others in her crusade to seen, noticed or made to feel important. Melanie White is a gutless pig, and she would be, to be hunkered down in a hate-site crowing for the victims one minute and reviling them the next. Real schizo.
But thanks for that confession Melanie, it goes a long way in establishing the deliberate patterns of the hate-site in their intentions to persecute Joe Karam and others, it help sets the framework to show that the driving force is not an interest in Justice but to hide the dirty deeds of a dirty daddy by lies against the living. It destroys the credibility of Counterspin and it's members and that is exactly what is required first of all in the coming defamation cases (including Trade Mes - if they don't settle,) then later to fix the costs personal and monetary to many of victims of the hate-campaign. I'll be in Court listening to you read out your 'confession' and being cross examined on it. Kent was always doomed, but ensured that to be the case by having idiots like Melanie around.
I see now Melanie so sadly can no longer mention her hate-sites on TM, it's only the beginning though Melanie, the rout has just begun for you and the others.
Melanie is incapable of understanding the harm she does to others in her crusade to seen, noticed or made to feel important. Melanie White is a gutless pig, and she would be, to be hunkered down in a hate-site crowing for the victims one minute and reviling them the next. Real schizo.
But thanks for that confession Melanie, it goes a long way in establishing the deliberate patterns of the hate-site in their intentions to persecute Joe Karam and others, it help sets the framework to show that the driving force is not an interest in Justice but to hide the dirty deeds of a dirty daddy by lies against the living. It destroys the credibility of Counterspin and it's members and that is exactly what is required first of all in the coming defamation cases (including Trade Mes - if they don't settle,) then later to fix the costs personal and monetary to many of victims of the hate-campaign. I'll be in Court listening to you read out your 'confession' and being cross examined on it. Kent was always doomed, but ensured that to be the case by having idiots like Melanie around.
I see now Melanie so sadly can no longer mention her hate-sites on TM, it's only the beginning though Melanie, the rout has just begun for you and the others.
Saturday, November 27, 2010
Oh look three lying kiddie fiddler supporters, Denise Cameron, William Rodie and Rachael Membery are
bumping the thread for the dead freemason kiddie fiddler.
Friday, November 26, 2010
Palace Hotel in Auckland what happened? (2)
Mayor Len made a press release that seems to confirm the report that the Cho brothers are likely to sue the Council and the demolition contractor as one brother said on the eve of the demolition of the old building. Mayor Len said he had a preliminary report but he wasn't going to release it because some parties were being hostile and threatening litigation. I think Len, a lawyer, knows that the information will be discovered to the Cho brothers if they go ahead. But he may not know that by 10pm on the eve of the old hotel's destruction the building had ceased to move, he also might not know that the demolition was videoed and clearly shows how strong and stable the heart of the building remained and it's defiance against the excavator bucket.
If Mayor looks at Ch Ch he will have seen the time given to carefully assess the condition of heritage buildings, there was no rush, as there needed to be no rush in Auckland - the area was cordoned off, slightly inconvenient yes but dangerous no. Moreover, Mayor Len may not know of the efforts may in Chch to support the damaged buildings whilst repairs might be made, or that the same happened with the Auckland High Court in relatively recent years. I think Mayor Len already knows that Council engineers approved and signed off the work to be done on the Hotel and also that the Chos (whose investment in the building was huge)merely asked for time for a second opinion to save the 100 year plus building. It was reported in the papers that the annexes were showing the most fragility not the building proper giving rise to another issue if the damage on the annexes could in anyway promote the need to demolish the entire building proper or if resin could have been sprayed into the cracks and temporary braces put in place to see if that might have brought a remedy that the digger buckets never would.
If Mayor looks at Ch Ch he will have seen the time given to carefully assess the condition of heritage buildings, there was no rush, as there needed to be no rush in Auckland - the area was cordoned off, slightly inconvenient yes but dangerous no. Moreover, Mayor Len may not know of the efforts may in Chch to support the damaged buildings whilst repairs might be made, or that the same happened with the Auckland High Court in relatively recent years. I think Mayor Len already knows that Council engineers approved and signed off the work to be done on the Hotel and also that the Chos (whose investment in the building was huge)merely asked for time for a second opinion to save the 100 year plus building. It was reported in the papers that the annexes were showing the most fragility not the building proper giving rise to another issue if the damage on the annexes could in anyway promote the need to demolish the entire building proper or if resin could have been sprayed into the cracks and temporary braces put in place to see if that might have brought a remedy that the digger buckets never would.
William Rodie and Rachael Membery have defamed Joe Karam
many times, the most recently about David falling and banging his head beside the bed. They chorused this at length as though it might put in order all the forensic proof against Robin. They freely defame Karam not withstanding that they don't have the trial transcript, that rely on paper reports and information from discredited hate-sites. I imagine they see Joe Karam as a sitting target, an easy target using phrases such as the 'mountain of evidence against David,' or that dim-witted people are easily taken in by Karam. But hang on, wouldn't you have to be sure of your grounds, wouldn't you need to read the evidence carefully, not just some 'cleverly edited' piece fed from a hate site, because it is important before sticking your neck out to be sure of what you're saying, particularly if it is about a person who has shown all the tenacity in the world and prevailed against the odds. Time to look at what dopey sophy and retard said....
Speaking of untruths check this out.
Joe Karams version of what constable Andrews said at court, from radio live.
Karam [Quote] David Bain did faint, when he fainted he crashed down between, and banged his head, the officer Andrews who was with David when David fainted and crashed down behind the bed saw David crash down behind the bed and it was the constable Andrews who gave this evidence about him crashing down and banging his head on the wall by the window sill in his bedroom on the right side of his face, now that’s the evidence in the trial. [End Quote]
And here we have what the officer Andrews actually said in court in 2009, from page 336 of the transcripts.
Constable Andrews answers questions.
Q. And then the accused falling back?
A. Backwards, yeah.
Q. Backwards. Did you observe him hit his head or strike any part of his body?
A. NO I DIDN'T.
And below how this evidence was accurately reported in newspapers.
From: http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/2257185/Crown-alleges-
David-Bain-faked-a-fit
Leslie Andrew, a police constable who was one of the first three officers to enter the house after the 111 call from Bain, said he stayed with Bain as the two other officers checked the house.
He watched Bain from the doorway of his bedroom and when a dog barked from down the hall, Bain called: "Here Casey, Casey, Casey." When the other officers shouted that they had found five bodies, he saw Bain shaking for about 10 seconds and then falling backwards.
He noticed Bain's eyes were normal before he fell back, which he thought was "a bit strange".
"If he was having a fit his eyes would react as well," Andrew said.
He had seen people have fits before and had noticed their eyes would flicker and the whites of the eyes become prominent.
Andrew said he had pulled Bain out from the tight spot where he had fallen and placed him in a recovery position.
Bain, who looked straight at him as he pulled him out, did not hit his head or any part of his body and was limp.
From: http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/2254954/Crown-question
s-Bain-fit
Earlier, the police officer who saw David Bain have the fit that morning, Constable Leslie Andrew, said the episode seemed "strange''.
Andrew said Bain was sitting on his bedroom floor and then began shaking for 10 to 12 seconds before he fell backwards in a fit the Crown says was fake.
Andrew had observed other people have fits and their eyes normally changed and the whites became prominent before an attack.
Bain's eyes did not change before the fit and his episode seemed "strange'', he said.
Bain did not strike his head in the fit and when he went to assist David his eyes were open and he was "looking straight at me'', he said.
Andrew dragged a limp Bain into the recovery position and an ambulance officer was called.
-------------------------------
-------------------------------
-------------------
As you can see Joe Karams version of what was said, completely contradicts what Constable Leslie Andrew actually said when questioned at the Bain trial in 2009 and as reported by both Martin Van Beynen and Ian Steward for Christchurch's daily newspaper.
Quotesophier8 (1 ) 5:04 pm, Wed 24 Nov #30833
To repeat Dopey sophy's apparent trump card...
Q. And then the accused falling back?
A. Backwards, yeah.
Q. Backwards. Did you observe him hit his head or strike any part of his body?
A. NO I DIDN'T.
If you were an idiot and a desperate hate-siter like William Rodie and Rachael Membery you might think the above was some sort of paydirt. But to do so you need to omit the obvious that David did hit his head and strike part of his body and can only take Andrew's evidence when asked if he saw (that) as (like he said) A. No I didn't.' Which is far different than saying 'I saw him fall and he didn't strike any part of his body or head.' So if Mr Karam in his efforts to protect his good name decided to sue dopey sophy (Kirkdmaiden) William Rodie or goldnkiwi Rachael Dickyberryass Rachael Membery they'd be up the creek. But not as far as they imagine, because their lawyer, if they could afford one, would read the evidence and search for the complete answer to any defamation charges, but he or she wouldn't find it from carefully reading the evidence. What he or she would find is that no witness, not one, gave any evidence of seeing any bruises on David, before he fell. Oh dear how sad, tie up your ass and sad goodbye to your bees. And then look above again at the title William Rodie chose and which Retard Rachael Membery repeated 'Speaking of untruths check this out.' Well, you should have checked it out before you opened your big mouths Rachy and Little Willie, and you should have thought long and hard before defaming Joe Karam on a public message board that has already given rise to several hundred defamation charges, and you shouldn't have listened to idiots like OBrien and Curran because look where it has got you trusting 'your secrets are safe with me Curran and OBrien.' Oh goody, goody.
Speaking of untruths check this out.
Joe Karams version of what constable Andrews said at court, from radio live.
Karam [Quote] David Bain did faint, when he fainted he crashed down between, and banged his head, the officer Andrews who was with David when David fainted and crashed down behind the bed saw David crash down behind the bed and it was the constable Andrews who gave this evidence about him crashing down and banging his head on the wall by the window sill in his bedroom on the right side of his face, now that’s the evidence in the trial. [End Quote]
And here we have what the officer Andrews actually said in court in 2009, from page 336 of the transcripts.
Constable Andrews answers questions.
Q. And then the accused falling back?
A. Backwards, yeah.
Q. Backwards. Did you observe him hit his head or strike any part of his body?
A. NO I DIDN'T.
And below how this evidence was accurately reported in newspapers.
From: http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/2257185/Crown-alleges-
David-Bain-faked-a-fit
Leslie Andrew, a police constable who was one of the first three officers to enter the house after the 111 call from Bain, said he stayed with Bain as the two other officers checked the house.
He watched Bain from the doorway of his bedroom and when a dog barked from down the hall, Bain called: "Here Casey, Casey, Casey." When the other officers shouted that they had found five bodies, he saw Bain shaking for about 10 seconds and then falling backwards.
He noticed Bain's eyes were normal before he fell back, which he thought was "a bit strange".
"If he was having a fit his eyes would react as well," Andrew said.
He had seen people have fits before and had noticed their eyes would flicker and the whites of the eyes become prominent.
Andrew said he had pulled Bain out from the tight spot where he had fallen and placed him in a recovery position.
Bain, who looked straight at him as he pulled him out, did not hit his head or any part of his body and was limp.
From: http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/2254954/Crown-question
s-Bain-fit
Earlier, the police officer who saw David Bain have the fit that morning, Constable Leslie Andrew, said the episode seemed "strange''.
Andrew said Bain was sitting on his bedroom floor and then began shaking for 10 to 12 seconds before he fell backwards in a fit the Crown says was fake.
Andrew had observed other people have fits and their eyes normally changed and the whites became prominent before an attack.
Bain's eyes did not change before the fit and his episode seemed "strange'', he said.
Bain did not strike his head in the fit and when he went to assist David his eyes were open and he was "looking straight at me'', he said.
Andrew dragged a limp Bain into the recovery position and an ambulance officer was called.
-------------------------------
-------------------------------
-------------------
As you can see Joe Karams version of what was said, completely contradicts what Constable Leslie Andrew actually said when questioned at the Bain trial in 2009 and as reported by both Martin Van Beynen and Ian Steward for Christchurch's daily newspaper.
Quotesophier8 (1 ) 5:04 pm, Wed 24 Nov #30833
To repeat Dopey sophy's apparent trump card...
Q. And then the accused falling back?
A. Backwards, yeah.
Q. Backwards. Did you observe him hit his head or strike any part of his body?
A. NO I DIDN'T.
If you were an idiot and a desperate hate-siter like William Rodie and Rachael Membery you might think the above was some sort of paydirt. But to do so you need to omit the obvious that David did hit his head and strike part of his body and can only take Andrew's evidence when asked if he saw (that) as (like he said) A. No I didn't.' Which is far different than saying 'I saw him fall and he didn't strike any part of his body or head.' So if Mr Karam in his efforts to protect his good name decided to sue dopey sophy (Kirkdmaiden) William Rodie or goldnkiwi Rachael Dickyberryass Rachael Membery they'd be up the creek. But not as far as they imagine, because their lawyer, if they could afford one, would read the evidence and search for the complete answer to any defamation charges, but he or she wouldn't find it from carefully reading the evidence. What he or she would find is that no witness, not one, gave any evidence of seeing any bruises on David, before he fell. Oh dear how sad, tie up your ass and sad goodbye to your bees. And then look above again at the title William Rodie chose and which Retard Rachael Membery repeated 'Speaking of untruths check this out.' Well, you should have checked it out before you opened your big mouths Rachy and Little Willie, and you should have thought long and hard before defaming Joe Karam on a public message board that has already given rise to several hundred defamation charges, and you shouldn't have listened to idiots like OBrien and Curran because look where it has got you trusting 'your secrets are safe with me Curran and OBrien.' Oh goody, goody.
Retard Rachael Membery from Otorohanga goes for it again.
Sad individual, lots of love, lots of laughs, laugh out loud, prefer you not to wonder about me, it makes me feel tainted, thanks all the same. lol
Quotegoldnkiwi (609 ) 12:21 am, Fri 26 Nov #30844
Get use to it Retard, you crossed a line and involved yourself in stalking and in hate-sites. You felt empowered to persecute David Bain and others over a case that you don't, won't or can't understand because your opinion was formed by hatred that you can't get over, and by rumour and lies and prejudice. I hope you do feel tainted, because you are a person tainted with hate and lies, someone willing to go into the lives of strangers you don't really know apart from reading a message board or from correspondence from your hate-site mates OBrien and Curran, not only the lives of strangers but of their families including children, a price comes with that and you are being repaid with interest get use to it - those you sought to victimise turned the tables on you and it isn't a picnic table Rachael. No no no, not a picnic.
Quotegoldnkiwi (609 ) 12:21 am, Fri 26 Nov #30844
Get use to it Retard, you crossed a line and involved yourself in stalking and in hate-sites. You felt empowered to persecute David Bain and others over a case that you don't, won't or can't understand because your opinion was formed by hatred that you can't get over, and by rumour and lies and prejudice. I hope you do feel tainted, because you are a person tainted with hate and lies, someone willing to go into the lives of strangers you don't really know apart from reading a message board or from correspondence from your hate-site mates OBrien and Curran, not only the lives of strangers but of their families including children, a price comes with that and you are being repaid with interest get use to it - those you sought to victimise turned the tables on you and it isn't a picnic table Rachael. No no no, not a picnic.
The lying accused kiddle fiddler Lindsay Kennard says.
I know of no country that pays compensation as of right following an acquittal at trial. The Miscarriage of Justice you speak of was extinguished when the Privy Council quashed the conviction and ordered a retrial. The defence and Mr Karam admitted there was a case to answer when they asked for a retrial.
In other words they said David was on the face of it without testing the prosecution case, guilty.
This is also what the Privy Council said when they threw out the application for a stay.
Quotelinz4me (279 ) 10:09 pm, Thu 25 Nov #30842
You are a lying piece of crap Kennard, Joe Karam has never conceded 'In other words they said David was on the face of it without testing the prosecution case, guilty.' You're nothing more than a filthy hate-siter with an unnatural interest in children as attested by one of your former wifes. The MOJ isn't righted, the false imprisonment has stopped but redress for the time in prison and other associated loss and damages has not. Don't quote the law you f...ing idiot, do what Scot Watson's father told you to do...shutup ya drunken fiddler. Prima facie, of which I know of no such concession by Joe Karam, means simply on the face of it a case to answer. Go have another sherry and kiss your dog.
In other words they said David was on the face of it without testing the prosecution case, guilty.
This is also what the Privy Council said when they threw out the application for a stay.
Quotelinz4me (279 ) 10:09 pm, Thu 25 Nov #30842
You are a lying piece of crap Kennard, Joe Karam has never conceded 'In other words they said David was on the face of it without testing the prosecution case, guilty.' You're nothing more than a filthy hate-siter with an unnatural interest in children as attested by one of your former wifes. The MOJ isn't righted, the false imprisonment has stopped but redress for the time in prison and other associated loss and damages has not. Don't quote the law you f...ing idiot, do what Scot Watson's father told you to do...shutup ya drunken fiddler. Prima facie, of which I know of no such concession by Joe Karam, means simply on the face of it a case to answer. Go have another sherry and kiss your dog.
Thursday, November 25, 2010
I hope that I have in myself to note with uncertainty,
whether or not my decision, a decision was right or not. No one can talk in absolutes about Pike River to the point that sides form to counter one another. One voice says, see, there have been two explosions in 6 days, while another says that for 6 days there has been safety to go into the mine. And I wonder about absolutes when none of us can be sure: can't be sure would suit me until we know, if we ever know. I'm not deceived by the idea that the OIC could act, or would act without consent of our highest elected officers. Some body's hands should go up, not that of a Regional Commander because he isn't, and never was the boss. And men, like the decorated police officer this year who pulled the boy from the burning wreck take risks, and families do but I don't think that anyone should say..I take the risk from you and I am right.
Wednesday, November 24, 2010
When Christchurch suffered the continuing earthquakes
Bob Parker was the man in charge. When Pike River mine exploded Greymouth Mayor Tony Kokshoern was shut out. When he commented about anything, it was without Government Ministers or Police at his shoulders. The power was taken from the Community and families in a situation of who it was to control the recovery or rescue of their fallen family members while their elected representative was ignored. Something was lost when control was taken by the Police as Government members stood by, because miners, families and friends got shut out. They got locked out as though they were strikers or trouble makers without wit who needed obligatory condolences from outsiders.
Farah Davids answers.....
David Farrah, on Kiwiblog, wrote this nonsense list: http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2009/06/the_david_bain_case.html
Farah Davids answers with some reality. (I take the opportunity to add comment here or there)
DF “So what do you have to believe, to think Robin Bain was the killer. This list is not comprehensive, and is even a bit repetitive. But here goes:
It was a lucky guess when David Bain told 111 ambulance officer they are all dead, despite later saying he only saw two bodies
ans.David Bain told the 111 ambulance officer they are all dead because he was in a highly stressed, confused state, hyperventilating and at that stage his memory was not as impaired as it became
Again a lucky guess hen DB told police officer they are all dead
ans.Again when he told the police officer they were all dead it was before the effects of the stress on memory
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.
ans.The 25 minute gap between getting home and calling 111 was occupied with routine tasks including putting the washing on, then some time of panic as he discovered the bodies
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
ans.The bruises on David’s head were caused by a fall in a state of stress-induced syncope, the scratches on his chest occurred after he had been examined by Dr Pryde, and the injury to his knee was caused in a similar way to the bruises
The lens from his glasses found in Stephen’s room happened weeks ago and he never noticed OR someone else had borrowed the glasses
ans.The lens from his mother’s old glasses appeared in Stephen’s room by some cause other than being involved in a fight with his brother.
The lack of fresh injuries on Robin despite the massive struggle with Stephen is just the product of healthy living
ans.The fresh injuries on Robin Bain’s hands may have been incurred during a fight with Stephen
David’s finger prints on gun are from a previous time
ans.David’s fingerprints on the gun were not indicative of having fired the gun
David telling a friend he had premonition something bad was going to happen was a genuine psychic experience
ans.David telling a friend that he had a sense that something bad was going to happen was because she had not broken up with her previous boyfriend and such complications and deceit usually lead to trouble
Stephen’s blood on David’s clothing was nothing to do with the struggle – OR someone else borrowed his clothes
ans.The small amounts of Stephen’s blood got on David’s clothing through him kneeling down by Stephen’s body and brushing against things
Robin managed to execute his family on a full bladder
ans.Robin’s bladder was not so full that he would necessarily have even been aware of it, let alone have an urgency to pee. The colouration interpreted as ‘concentrated’ may have been due to the delay to autopsy
The lock and key to the rifle being found in David’s room is not relevant as they were obviously placed there
ans.The lock and key to the rifle being found in David’s room makes sense as that’s where the rifle was kept.
Robin decided to wash David’s green jersey to remove blood and the fibres from jersey found under Steven’s finger nails
ans.Robin decided to drop the bloodied jersey into the wash as an automatic thing as he wasn’t thinking straight and he had gone to the bathroom by the laundry to clean himself. The fibres from the jersey found under Stephen’s fingernails were from Stephen fighting with Robin.
David’s bloody palm print on the washing machine was from him checking the bodies
ans.David’s bloody palm print on the washing machine (not visible to the naked eye) was from handling bloodied clothes or some other innocent reason.
...I comment, the indication of blood may have been a reaction to soap powder rather than blood.
The Ambulance officer was wrong when he said in his opinion Bain was pretending to have a fit
ans.The Ambulance officer’s opinion that Bain was pretending to have a fit was wrong, and that the first-response routine suspicion of syncope both fits the symptoms perfectly and does not appear to have been checked for
...I comment, another Ambulance officer present did not share the same opinion as the first.
Robin Bain would logically wear gloves to prevent fingerprints despite it being a murder-suicide
ans.Robin Bain would wear gloves for some unknowable reason despite it being a murder-suicide; and that the blood smears and substance described as blood under his fingernails may have been a residue from wearing the bloodied gloves
...I comment, the blood smears inculpated Robin. They could only have arrived on his hands from being in direct contact with the blood or some item bearing the blood.
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.
ans.That Robin Bain would type a note on the computer trying to explain, and that it may not have occurred to him to think David might be held responsible.
...I comment, not to overlook the computer turn on time excluded David from being home according to the witness Mrs Laney. Robin was a habitual computer user, his choice between a letter or a computer message does not ursurp the forensic proof of suicide discovered in the lounge. At best, the computer message can be seen as irrelevant to either side of the argument when compared to the final death scene.
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
ans.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 rather than leave the room he was in (where he could see out to the street and see David coming) to look for alternative writing materials
...I comment, I'm reluctant to accept what Robin may or may not have been thinking. I expect he would be sated, exhausted, disgusted and frightened by what he had done. To consider he may have some how been rationally considering any aspect of the events of that day or earlier is unhelpful and no conclusion can be drawn.
Robin would decide David deserved to live, but go out of his way to frame him for murder
ans.Robin would decide David deserved to live, and it may not occur to him that David might be charged with murder
Robin Bain placed fibres from Davids jersey under Stephen’s finger nails
ans.Stephen Bain had fibres from a jersey too small for David but worn by Robin under his finger nails
Robin Bain would shoot himself with a gun in the most awkward way possible?
ans.Robin Bain would shoot himself with a gun in a way fairly common for suicide by rifle
...I comment, a right hand dominate suicide by a right handed person is the least awkward temple shot.
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?
ans.That Robin Bain removed the bloody jersey after he had killed his family and put it with dirty laundry and then changed into the clothes he had been wearing the night before before killing himself. David washed the jersey, a cop hung it on the line.
...I comment, I didn't know that a police officer hung out the Jury? That sounds bizzare to be frank.
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.
ans.That the logical reason that David Bain cannot account for the injuries on his face, the bruise or the scraped knee, yet knows he did not have them during his paper run, is simply that he was in a state of acute and severe stress, at times only semi-conscious, with his memory for events after finding his mother dead very impaired.
...I comment, exactly.
That Robin Bain put blood on the inside of David’s duvet and on his light switch
ans.That Robin Bain probably put blood on David’s light switch; and the blood on the inside of David’s duvet may have come from Robin, David (who had blood on him) or the cat or dog
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.
ans.That the innocent explanation for why David says he put on washing before he discovered the bodies is that he was following his usual routine, and the print (possibly blood) on the washing machine probably arose from handling the bloodied clothes.
That Laniet was being paranoid when she told friends she was scared of David
ans.That Laniet told her friends that she was scared of the meeting, and that David wouldn’t let her duck out of it. And that this has been interpreted as somehow sinister.
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.
ans.That the “family meeting” called the previous night and David insisted everyone attended was merely a family meeting when the family had not been together for a while – possibly a Quaker ‘meeting’. And that this has been interpreted as somehow sinister.
That Robin Bain would wear a hat while shooting himself in the head.
ans.That Robin Bain wouldn’t bother to remove his hat to shoot himself in the head, just push it to one side. And that this has been interpreted as somehow sinister.
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
ans.That David told a relative he hated his father when trying to accept his father had killed his family. That for some reason his father decided David was the only one who deserved to stay.
That David either imagined hearing Laniet gurgling or she gurgled 20 minutes after death
ans.That David either imagined hearing Laniet gurgling, or she gurgled after death, or he mistook something else for gurgling
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.
ans.That Laniet was making allegations of Robin sexually abusing her, and that her claims of having had a baby or an abortion may be true or may be symptomatic of a disturbed girl.
That Robin Bain managed to kill four family members without a single trace of his blood, skin, or DNA being left at the scene.
ans.That Robin Bain killed four family members, leaving traces of his blood his blood and DNA in several places in the house and the caravan.
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.
ans.That Bain had an alibi the morning of the murders having been seen on the paper round at the normal times by several witnesses.
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.
ans.That the magazine found balanced on an edge next to Robin may have been placed there by Robin or may have fallen like that due to proximity with Robin’s hand.
...I comment, I don't accept that it fell in that way. Also I don't accept that the magazine might not have been placed in that fashion sometime during the inquiry when items of were being moved. Regardless, the situation of the magazine makes no purchase against the forensic evidence showing Robin as killer and suicidee.
34. That a sickly Robin Bain managed to overpower his teendage son who put up a furious fight
That Robin Bain managed to overpower his teenage son who was partly incapacitated by a shot through his hand and a gouge through his scalp
...I comment, as I understand the gouge through the scalp may have also resulted in Stephen's death without further effort by the killer?
That Robin Bain went and got the newspaper from outside, despite planning to shoot himself
ans.That either Robin or David Bain brought the newspaper from outside.
...I comment, no point delving into what Robin may have been thinking if he did in fact bring the paper inside. Inconclusive.
Farah also points out a few more things you need to understand to understand that Robin Bain shot himself.
1) There was evidence of a close-contact shot (there was: blood inside the barrel of the rifle caused by ‘drawback’) which is much more likely in suicide (it is).
2) That Robin Bain was absolutely typical of men who commit this sort of atrocity, while David Bain would have had to be a psychopath, and he is not.
3) That the allegations of incest provide an explanation of a possible trigger, but the incest does not have to be proven.
4) That the signs of possible depression in Robin Bain are explanatory but not essential.
5) That the media reporting of the trial was disgracefully one-sided, and anyone trying to form an opinion based on media reports alone is disadvantaged.
6) That there are people who have a vested interest in David Bain being thought guilty despite the verdicts
...I comment, thanks for the above Farah. Trust my comment is taken with generosity and I note, and accept your neutrality on some issues of which I have more forceful views.
Farah Davids answers with some reality. (I take the opportunity to add comment here or there)
DF “So what do you have to believe, to think Robin Bain was the killer. This list is not comprehensive, and is even a bit repetitive. But here goes:
It was a lucky guess when David Bain told 111 ambulance officer they are all dead, despite later saying he only saw two bodies
ans.David Bain told the 111 ambulance officer they are all dead because he was in a highly stressed, confused state, hyperventilating and at that stage his memory was not as impaired as it became
Again a lucky guess hen DB told police officer they are all dead
ans.Again when he told the police officer they were all dead it was before the effects of the stress on memory
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.
ans.The 25 minute gap between getting home and calling 111 was occupied with routine tasks including putting the washing on, then some time of panic as he discovered the bodies
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
ans.The bruises on David’s head were caused by a fall in a state of stress-induced syncope, the scratches on his chest occurred after he had been examined by Dr Pryde, and the injury to his knee was caused in a similar way to the bruises
The lens from his glasses found in Stephen’s room happened weeks ago and he never noticed OR someone else had borrowed the glasses
ans.The lens from his mother’s old glasses appeared in Stephen’s room by some cause other than being involved in a fight with his brother.
The lack of fresh injuries on Robin despite the massive struggle with Stephen is just the product of healthy living
ans.The fresh injuries on Robin Bain’s hands may have been incurred during a fight with Stephen
David’s finger prints on gun are from a previous time
ans.David’s fingerprints on the gun were not indicative of having fired the gun
David telling a friend he had premonition something bad was going to happen was a genuine psychic experience
ans.David telling a friend that he had a sense that something bad was going to happen was because she had not broken up with her previous boyfriend and such complications and deceit usually lead to trouble
Stephen’s blood on David’s clothing was nothing to do with the struggle – OR someone else borrowed his clothes
ans.The small amounts of Stephen’s blood got on David’s clothing through him kneeling down by Stephen’s body and brushing against things
Robin managed to execute his family on a full bladder
ans.Robin’s bladder was not so full that he would necessarily have even been aware of it, let alone have an urgency to pee. The colouration interpreted as ‘concentrated’ may have been due to the delay to autopsy
The lock and key to the rifle being found in David’s room is not relevant as they were obviously placed there
ans.The lock and key to the rifle being found in David’s room makes sense as that’s where the rifle was kept.
Robin decided to wash David’s green jersey to remove blood and the fibres from jersey found under Steven’s finger nails
ans.Robin decided to drop the bloodied jersey into the wash as an automatic thing as he wasn’t thinking straight and he had gone to the bathroom by the laundry to clean himself. The fibres from the jersey found under Stephen’s fingernails were from Stephen fighting with Robin.
David’s bloody palm print on the washing machine was from him checking the bodies
ans.David’s bloody palm print on the washing machine (not visible to the naked eye) was from handling bloodied clothes or some other innocent reason.
...I comment, the indication of blood may have been a reaction to soap powder rather than blood.
The Ambulance officer was wrong when he said in his opinion Bain was pretending to have a fit
ans.The Ambulance officer’s opinion that Bain was pretending to have a fit was wrong, and that the first-response routine suspicion of syncope both fits the symptoms perfectly and does not appear to have been checked for
...I comment, another Ambulance officer present did not share the same opinion as the first.
Robin Bain would logically wear gloves to prevent fingerprints despite it being a murder-suicide
ans.Robin Bain would wear gloves for some unknowable reason despite it being a murder-suicide; and that the blood smears and substance described as blood under his fingernails may have been a residue from wearing the bloodied gloves
...I comment, the blood smears inculpated Robin. They could only have arrived on his hands from being in direct contact with the blood or some item bearing the blood.
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.
ans.That Robin Bain would type a note on the computer trying to explain, and that it may not have occurred to him to think David might be held responsible.
...I comment, not to overlook the computer turn on time excluded David from being home according to the witness Mrs Laney. Robin was a habitual computer user, his choice between a letter or a computer message does not ursurp the forensic proof of suicide discovered in the lounge. At best, the computer message can be seen as irrelevant to either side of the argument when compared to the final death scene.
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
ans.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 rather than leave the room he was in (where he could see out to the street and see David coming) to look for alternative writing materials
...I comment, I'm reluctant to accept what Robin may or may not have been thinking. I expect he would be sated, exhausted, disgusted and frightened by what he had done. To consider he may have some how been rationally considering any aspect of the events of that day or earlier is unhelpful and no conclusion can be drawn.
Robin would decide David deserved to live, but go out of his way to frame him for murder
ans.Robin would decide David deserved to live, and it may not occur to him that David might be charged with murder
Robin Bain placed fibres from Davids jersey under Stephen’s finger nails
ans.Stephen Bain had fibres from a jersey too small for David but worn by Robin under his finger nails
Robin Bain would shoot himself with a gun in the most awkward way possible?
ans.Robin Bain would shoot himself with a gun in a way fairly common for suicide by rifle
...I comment, a right hand dominate suicide by a right handed person is the least awkward temple shot.
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?
ans.That Robin Bain removed the bloody jersey after he had killed his family and put it with dirty laundry and then changed into the clothes he had been wearing the night before before killing himself. David washed the jersey, a cop hung it on the line.
...I comment, I didn't know that a police officer hung out the Jury? That sounds bizzare to be frank.
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.
ans.That the logical reason that David Bain cannot account for the injuries on his face, the bruise or the scraped knee, yet knows he did not have them during his paper run, is simply that he was in a state of acute and severe stress, at times only semi-conscious, with his memory for events after finding his mother dead very impaired.
...I comment, exactly.
That Robin Bain put blood on the inside of David’s duvet and on his light switch
ans.That Robin Bain probably put blood on David’s light switch; and the blood on the inside of David’s duvet may have come from Robin, David (who had blood on him) or the cat or dog
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.
ans.That the innocent explanation for why David says he put on washing before he discovered the bodies is that he was following his usual routine, and the print (possibly blood) on the washing machine probably arose from handling the bloodied clothes.
That Laniet was being paranoid when she told friends she was scared of David
ans.That Laniet told her friends that she was scared of the meeting, and that David wouldn’t let her duck out of it. And that this has been interpreted as somehow sinister.
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.
ans.That the “family meeting” called the previous night and David insisted everyone attended was merely a family meeting when the family had not been together for a while – possibly a Quaker ‘meeting’. And that this has been interpreted as somehow sinister.
That Robin Bain would wear a hat while shooting himself in the head.
ans.That Robin Bain wouldn’t bother to remove his hat to shoot himself in the head, just push it to one side. And that this has been interpreted as somehow sinister.
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
ans.That David told a relative he hated his father when trying to accept his father had killed his family. That for some reason his father decided David was the only one who deserved to stay.
That David either imagined hearing Laniet gurgling or she gurgled 20 minutes after death
ans.That David either imagined hearing Laniet gurgling, or she gurgled after death, or he mistook something else for gurgling
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.
ans.That Laniet was making allegations of Robin sexually abusing her, and that her claims of having had a baby or an abortion may be true or may be symptomatic of a disturbed girl.
That Robin Bain managed to kill four family members without a single trace of his blood, skin, or DNA being left at the scene.
ans.That Robin Bain killed four family members, leaving traces of his blood his blood and DNA in several places in the house and the caravan.
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.
ans.That Bain had an alibi the morning of the murders having been seen on the paper round at the normal times by several witnesses.
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.
ans.That the magazine found balanced on an edge next to Robin may have been placed there by Robin or may have fallen like that due to proximity with Robin’s hand.
...I comment, I don't accept that it fell in that way. Also I don't accept that the magazine might not have been placed in that fashion sometime during the inquiry when items of were being moved. Regardless, the situation of the magazine makes no purchase against the forensic evidence showing Robin as killer and suicidee.
34. That a sickly Robin Bain managed to overpower his teendage son who put up a furious fight
That Robin Bain managed to overpower his teenage son who was partly incapacitated by a shot through his hand and a gouge through his scalp
...I comment, as I understand the gouge through the scalp may have also resulted in Stephen's death without further effort by the killer?
That Robin Bain went and got the newspaper from outside, despite planning to shoot himself
ans.That either Robin or David Bain brought the newspaper from outside.
...I comment, no point delving into what Robin may have been thinking if he did in fact bring the paper inside. Inconclusive.
Farah also points out a few more things you need to understand to understand that Robin Bain shot himself.
1) There was evidence of a close-contact shot (there was: blood inside the barrel of the rifle caused by ‘drawback’) which is much more likely in suicide (it is).
2) That Robin Bain was absolutely typical of men who commit this sort of atrocity, while David Bain would have had to be a psychopath, and he is not.
3) That the allegations of incest provide an explanation of a possible trigger, but the incest does not have to be proven.
4) That the signs of possible depression in Robin Bain are explanatory but not essential.
5) That the media reporting of the trial was disgracefully one-sided, and anyone trying to form an opinion based on media reports alone is disadvantaged.
6) That there are people who have a vested interest in David Bain being thought guilty despite the verdicts
...I comment, thanks for the above Farah. Trust my comment is taken with generosity and I note, and accept your neutrality on some issues of which I have more forceful views.
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
Look, dopey sophey, the beekeeper William Rodie has confessed..
William Rodie always knew daddy's blood was in the rifle but it took him 16 years to confess....
Nana this is a first for me as I have never entered into discussion about the blood in the barrel, "whats the point" the reason I have not done that is because Robin was shot at point blank range so that is why there was blood in the barrel, the person who said there was blood in the barrel also said that in his opinion Robin Bain did not shoot himself, so of course all the blood in the barrel proves is that Robin was shot at very close range, which is something all of us understand. And by the way I am still waiting for your reply on this question' "who testified about David driving without his glasses, or was this just a figment of your imagination?
Quotesophier8 (1 ) 5:40 pm, Tue 23 Nov #30789
Thanks for that Willie, I hope you don't mind me calling you by your boy name instead of your girl name. But Willie, I must be old fashioned because I just think of your as old Willie fiddler. I bet you think that's so nice that you just want to have a jam tart, all sweety, sweety, widdle fiddle, widdle fiddle. And that's such an important confession you've made that you knew all along that it was point blank range shot even though the Crown experts were saying it was long range. I know what you mean Willie buddypal. However, little willie you've recorded that the person who you 'now' say said there was blood in the barrel also said that Robin did not shoot himself. But that's a lie isn't willie. Just a fat big lie by a widdle fiddler. You're just a big lying beekeeper William Rodie, get use to being caught out. Then I might call you 'caught out willie' or cow for short, that'll be jolly jolly.
Nana this is a first for me as I have never entered into discussion about the blood in the barrel, "whats the point" the reason I have not done that is because Robin was shot at point blank range so that is why there was blood in the barrel, the person who said there was blood in the barrel also said that in his opinion Robin Bain did not shoot himself, so of course all the blood in the barrel proves is that Robin was shot at very close range, which is something all of us understand. And by the way I am still waiting for your reply on this question' "who testified about David driving without his glasses, or was this just a figment of your imagination?
Quotesophier8 (1 ) 5:40 pm, Tue 23 Nov #30789
Thanks for that Willie, I hope you don't mind me calling you by your boy name instead of your girl name. But Willie, I must be old fashioned because I just think of your as old Willie fiddler. I bet you think that's so nice that you just want to have a jam tart, all sweety, sweety, widdle fiddle, widdle fiddle. And that's such an important confession you've made that you knew all along that it was point blank range shot even though the Crown experts were saying it was long range. I know what you mean Willie buddypal. However, little willie you've recorded that the person who you 'now' say said there was blood in the barrel also said that Robin did not shoot himself. But that's a lie isn't willie. Just a fat big lie by a widdle fiddler. You're just a big lying beekeeper William Rodie, get use to being caught out. Then I might call you 'caught out willie' or cow for short, that'll be jolly jolly.
The filthy hate-siters at work. This from Rachael Membery of Otorohanga, a law graduate....
trying to explain away the blood on Robin's shoes as being droplets..
And what is the definition of 'fresh' blood, perhaps it was from knocking the scab off his roofing injuries, perhaps it was from after the roofing injuries themselves. Gee if we stretch the credibility of the evidence to all the 'possibles' like are propounded on here in David's defence, was it even human, and oh my god, was it not his own, if it was his own was it mixed with anyone elses blood. No? didn't think so
Quotegoldnkiwi (609 ) 2:01 pm, Tue 23 Nov #30749
Manlove's evidence in chief p 3385 on
"Q. And also two other exhibits from Robin Bain, the socks and shoes of Robin Bain, is that correct?
A. That’s correct, yes.
Q. Now in dealing with the information that you received and the exhibits that you obtained, what techniques were you applying to your examinations? If you could just briefly outline what techniques you used?
A. We visually search items under control conditions and we were looking for blood for example, we would set out an exhibit, describe it, then visually search it first of all with the naked eye and then with the assistance of a light microscope, a low power microscope which we could zoom in a little closer to see if we could find microscopic traces of blood.
Q. Did you also use any DNA profiling and if so, what types?
A. We did, if we found any bloodstaining and it was deemed necessary to test it to attempt to determine its DNA profiling profile, we would remove the stain and submit it to the DNA profiling unit nearby where it would be subjected to a DNA profiling process known as SGM Plus.
Q. And in relation to bloodstain patterns, could you just tell us what the significance is of bloodstain patterns?
A. Bloodstain patterns can assist, I mean basically letting you know whether or not an action may have occurred in relation to an item or nearby to an item. By looking at bloodstain patterns one can typically comment on how they may have arisen. For example, a smear – a so-called contact stain would have arisen from an item wet with blood coming in contact with an item that is not wet with blood.
then (still Manlove) p 3392-3
Q. I would like to take you now to Robin Bain’s shoes, and perhaps if Mr Crier we could have exhibit L1 and L2 made available to the witness.
WITNESS REFERRED TO EXHIBITS L1 AND L2
Q. I understand the Court and members of the jury have copies of these photos. If you could just hold up for the members of the jury, yes exhibit L1. Now can you just describe for us what that was?
A. This is the upper surface of the right shoe of, I think it's item 246, the shoes from Robin Bain. There is some yellow circles on there, we do that to make it a little bit more apparent where there is potentially some scientific findings. On the front of the upper here there were three distinct bloodspots of airborne origin detected, whereas on the remainder of the shoe there were a number of red stains with the appearance of blood but which we couldn’t confirm were blood.
Q. I think in your examination and if you could just now pick up exhibit L2, you have a close up of a bloodstain on the shoe, could you describe what that is?
A. This is a bloodstain of airborne origin and again it's tending slightly towards that exclamation mark pattern that I described earlier, so you will see by its slightly smaller leading edge, if you like, that it is travelling in that particular direction. Now to orientate it on the shoe itself from exhibit L1 if I may.
Q. Yes that would be helpful.
A. The stain is travelling from what we call the inner aspect of the shoe, which is the side of the shoe that touches the other when you place your feet together, towards the outer aspect, slightly at an angle.
Q. So if you can just locate it for us on that shoe, just show us where it is, yes. And the direction is going from the middle of the shoe to the outer edge, to the right, is that correct?
A. That’s correct, yes.
Q. Can I just take you back to your reference to airborne, can you just describe what you mean by this mark being airborne?
A. Well the mark itself isn't airborne, it's indica – the bloodspot that is on the item is characteristic of a drop of blood that has travelled through the air and impacted the item, it leaves a characteristic stain that indicates it has originated from the air. The blood to begin travelling in an airborne manner, a force needs to be applied to it in the first place as blood pretty much likes to stay as it is, unless it is disturbed.
Q. So from your examination of this, was it your conclusion this was from an airborne position, that it dropped onto the shoe, is that what I am understanding?
A. That’s my conclusion, yes.
Q. Just in relation to scene A, and if I can take you back to what we saw in scene A, perhaps if we could go to photograph A5. What can you say about the stains that you have observed on the shoes being consistent with the position of Robin Bain, namely whether before the shot or at the time of the shot, whether he was kneeling, sitting, standing, what can you say?
A. If these stains originated at the time of the shot then the shoe would not have been occluded from the source of the blood. By kneeling you would tend to occlude the upper surface of a shoe, and therefore these spots couldn’t have originated as they did at the time of the shot."
In summary the blood on Robin's shoe was of airborne origin, spatter as indicated by..."the bloodspot that is on the item is characteristic of a drop of blood that has travelled through the air and impacted the item".....it was travelling left to right across the shoe and did not occur at the time of the shot....."If these stains originated at the time of the shot then the shoe would not have been occluded from the source of the blood. By kneeling you would tend to occlude the upper surface of a shoe, and therefore these spots couldn’t have originated as they did at the time of the shot.".....Therefore if the blood didn't find it's way onto daddy's shoe at the time of the last shot, it must have found it's way there earlier (from one of the victims.) It wasn't, as the scumbag law graduate would have you believe, a droplet from above (the unproven 'alleged' injuries from 'fixing' spouting) but rather high impact horizontal and falling as attested by its fore-leading tail to spread. Remembering also for the moment, the undisputed reality, Robin's wound was in his left temple, spatter doesn't do U turns in midair and proceed in the opposite direction left to right, it continues left, either horizontally, upward or downward but always left, ie right to left
Now a fit and proper person who has graduated law school one would assume has not only a inclination toward logic and fact but a duty toward it, so why does scumbag Rachael lie? What empowers her to the belief that she can freely lie about evidence that implicates her pinup idol while at the same time believing she can freely lie to persecute David Bain? Well, in fact she has no enforceable, or rightful entitlement or power to do that nor does anyone, but Rachael lives by a 'higher' standard, a law graduate, a real estate sales person, an aspirant representative of the people no less. Though sifting the material, looking below the pretence and posturing Rachael Membery is a persecuting dog, a mongrel. I hope she does sue me because I'll take all her money off her (if she has any) and donate to a foundation setup to investigate miscarriages of justice and the advent of hate sites, and hate-siters in our society.
And what is the definition of 'fresh' blood, perhaps it was from knocking the scab off his roofing injuries, perhaps it was from after the roofing injuries themselves. Gee if we stretch the credibility of the evidence to all the 'possibles' like are propounded on here in David's defence, was it even human, and oh my god, was it not his own, if it was his own was it mixed with anyone elses blood. No? didn't think so
Quotegoldnkiwi (609 ) 2:01 pm, Tue 23 Nov #30749
Manlove's evidence in chief p 3385 on
"Q. And also two other exhibits from Robin Bain, the socks and shoes of Robin Bain, is that correct?
A. That’s correct, yes.
Q. Now in dealing with the information that you received and the exhibits that you obtained, what techniques were you applying to your examinations? If you could just briefly outline what techniques you used?
A. We visually search items under control conditions and we were looking for blood for example, we would set out an exhibit, describe it, then visually search it first of all with the naked eye and then with the assistance of a light microscope, a low power microscope which we could zoom in a little closer to see if we could find microscopic traces of blood.
Q. Did you also use any DNA profiling and if so, what types?
A. We did, if we found any bloodstaining and it was deemed necessary to test it to attempt to determine its DNA profiling profile, we would remove the stain and submit it to the DNA profiling unit nearby where it would be subjected to a DNA profiling process known as SGM Plus.
Q. And in relation to bloodstain patterns, could you just tell us what the significance is of bloodstain patterns?
A. Bloodstain patterns can assist, I mean basically letting you know whether or not an action may have occurred in relation to an item or nearby to an item. By looking at bloodstain patterns one can typically comment on how they may have arisen. For example, a smear – a so-called contact stain would have arisen from an item wet with blood coming in contact with an item that is not wet with blood.
then (still Manlove) p 3392-3
Q. I would like to take you now to Robin Bain’s shoes, and perhaps if Mr Crier we could have exhibit L1 and L2 made available to the witness.
WITNESS REFERRED TO EXHIBITS L1 AND L2
Q. I understand the Court and members of the jury have copies of these photos. If you could just hold up for the members of the jury, yes exhibit L1. Now can you just describe for us what that was?
A. This is the upper surface of the right shoe of, I think it's item 246, the shoes from Robin Bain. There is some yellow circles on there, we do that to make it a little bit more apparent where there is potentially some scientific findings. On the front of the upper here there were three distinct bloodspots of airborne origin detected, whereas on the remainder of the shoe there were a number of red stains with the appearance of blood but which we couldn’t confirm were blood.
Q. I think in your examination and if you could just now pick up exhibit L2, you have a close up of a bloodstain on the shoe, could you describe what that is?
A. This is a bloodstain of airborne origin and again it's tending slightly towards that exclamation mark pattern that I described earlier, so you will see by its slightly smaller leading edge, if you like, that it is travelling in that particular direction. Now to orientate it on the shoe itself from exhibit L1 if I may.
Q. Yes that would be helpful.
A. The stain is travelling from what we call the inner aspect of the shoe, which is the side of the shoe that touches the other when you place your feet together, towards the outer aspect, slightly at an angle.
Q. So if you can just locate it for us on that shoe, just show us where it is, yes. And the direction is going from the middle of the shoe to the outer edge, to the right, is that correct?
A. That’s correct, yes.
Q. Can I just take you back to your reference to airborne, can you just describe what you mean by this mark being airborne?
A. Well the mark itself isn't airborne, it's indica – the bloodspot that is on the item is characteristic of a drop of blood that has travelled through the air and impacted the item, it leaves a characteristic stain that indicates it has originated from the air. The blood to begin travelling in an airborne manner, a force needs to be applied to it in the first place as blood pretty much likes to stay as it is, unless it is disturbed.
Q. So from your examination of this, was it your conclusion this was from an airborne position, that it dropped onto the shoe, is that what I am understanding?
A. That’s my conclusion, yes.
Q. Just in relation to scene A, and if I can take you back to what we saw in scene A, perhaps if we could go to photograph A5. What can you say about the stains that you have observed on the shoes being consistent with the position of Robin Bain, namely whether before the shot or at the time of the shot, whether he was kneeling, sitting, standing, what can you say?
A. If these stains originated at the time of the shot then the shoe would not have been occluded from the source of the blood. By kneeling you would tend to occlude the upper surface of a shoe, and therefore these spots couldn’t have originated as they did at the time of the shot."
In summary the blood on Robin's shoe was of airborne origin, spatter as indicated by..."the bloodspot that is on the item is characteristic of a drop of blood that has travelled through the air and impacted the item".....it was travelling left to right across the shoe and did not occur at the time of the shot....."If these stains originated at the time of the shot then the shoe would not have been occluded from the source of the blood. By kneeling you would tend to occlude the upper surface of a shoe, and therefore these spots couldn’t have originated as they did at the time of the shot.".....Therefore if the blood didn't find it's way onto daddy's shoe at the time of the last shot, it must have found it's way there earlier (from one of the victims.) It wasn't, as the scumbag law graduate would have you believe, a droplet from above (the unproven 'alleged' injuries from 'fixing' spouting) but rather high impact horizontal and falling as attested by its fore-leading tail to spread. Remembering also for the moment, the undisputed reality, Robin's wound was in his left temple, spatter doesn't do U turns in midair and proceed in the opposite direction left to right, it continues left, either horizontally, upward or downward but always left, ie right to left
Now a fit and proper person who has graduated law school one would assume has not only a inclination toward logic and fact but a duty toward it, so why does scumbag Rachael lie? What empowers her to the belief that she can freely lie about evidence that implicates her pinup idol while at the same time believing she can freely lie to persecute David Bain? Well, in fact she has no enforceable, or rightful entitlement or power to do that nor does anyone, but Rachael lives by a 'higher' standard, a law graduate, a real estate sales person, an aspirant representative of the people no less. Though sifting the material, looking below the pretence and posturing Rachael Membery is a persecuting dog, a mongrel. I hope she does sue me because I'll take all her money off her (if she has any) and donate to a foundation setup to investigate miscarriages of justice and the advent of hate sites, and hate-siters in our society.
Retard Rachael had a revelation and she wants an inquiry into it....
there is a need for wider societal concern because one day we will all be dead.
Quotegoldnkiwi (609 ) 12:50 pm, Tue 23 Nov #30735
I thought you might have known that Rachael Dickleberry, what with being a law graduate and a failed politician that life for humans is like life for a donkey and you know all about donkey's don't you? Maybe you've spent too much time with donkeys and it might be time for rehab, time to put your hooves up and give up the hay and carrots. Once they get to work on you they might discover that you're suffering dead donkey withdrawal symptoms and that's why you've been writing poems to dead donkeys - it could even be normal for someone like you with four hooves and you may merely need a good hoof clipping and an extra big carrot and off back to the paddock to eehaw with the other donkeys. Hope this has been some help.
Quotegoldnkiwi (609 ) 12:50 pm, Tue 23 Nov #30735
I thought you might have known that Rachael Dickleberry, what with being a law graduate and a failed politician that life for humans is like life for a donkey and you know all about donkey's don't you? Maybe you've spent too much time with donkeys and it might be time for rehab, time to put your hooves up and give up the hay and carrots. Once they get to work on you they might discover that you're suffering dead donkey withdrawal symptoms and that's why you've been writing poems to dead donkeys - it could even be normal for someone like you with four hooves and you may merely need a good hoof clipping and an extra big carrot and off back to the paddock to eehaw with the other donkeys. Hope this has been some help.
Monday, November 22, 2010
Dear Retard Rachael Dickleberry Membery,
Go ahead and sue dickhe... If you've got the guts, I'll look forward to proving that you are a liar, a donkey lover, sued your father, were investigated for election irregularities, that you are a hate siter involved in stalking...go right on ahead dickberry.
I believe they would argue that "you" are not identifiable by virtue of your pseudonym, lol I on the other hand, by some of the hints and comments and references to 'other' places that they have posted about me are, defamation cases sound like such good advertising don't they, I would of course have to go and look at those 'dark' places, but hey all in a good cause eh. I wonder if one of the weeklies would be interested?As soon as I have time perhaps, I could explore that, it would be good holiday reading, the insidiousness nastiness that 'lives' amongst us. That and the Weir book that is. Easiest to underline passages as one reads it and references for ease lol. Guess I had better not get a library copy then. Any information? It will be the first book on the subject that I will have read.
Quotegoldnkiwi (609 ) 3:42 pm, Mon 22 Nov #30698
I believe they would argue that "you" are not identifiable by virtue of your pseudonym, lol I on the other hand, by some of the hints and comments and references to 'other' places that they have posted about me are, defamation cases sound like such good advertising don't they, I would of course have to go and look at those 'dark' places, but hey all in a good cause eh. I wonder if one of the weeklies would be interested?As soon as I have time perhaps, I could explore that, it would be good holiday reading, the insidiousness nastiness that 'lives' amongst us. That and the Weir book that is. Easiest to underline passages as one reads it and references for ease lol. Guess I had better not get a library copy then. Any information? It will be the first book on the subject that I will have read.
Quotegoldnkiwi (609 ) 3:42 pm, Mon 22 Nov #30698
Why would I need to join.........when the site is leaking?
Kent Parker I just got a request from a FB user to join the group called Bob Eachway (probably Nos) Obviously bogus. The trick if you know how is to join the person and then ban him immediately. This means that he cannot keep trying to join and has to go away and create a new FB profile. If you do it quick enough they do not have time to do much on our page.
47 minutes ago ·LikeUnlike · Comment · View Feedback (2)Hide Feedback (2)
Mike Stockdale Yes,I saw that.I was just having a laugh about it.I always leave it for others to give the ok.But a bob each way is too obvious,could be just a prank.
37 minutes ago · LikeUnlike ·
Kent Parker It should be Bob NoWay :)
24 minutes ago · LikeUnlike ·
47 minutes ago ·LikeUnlike · Comment · View Feedback (2)Hide Feedback (2)
Mike Stockdale Yes,I saw that.I was just having a laugh about it.I always leave it for others to give the ok.But a bob each way is too obvious,could be just a prank.
37 minutes ago · LikeUnlike ·
Kent Parker It should be Bob NoWay :)
24 minutes ago · LikeUnlike ·
Space control to ash.....
Safe to land here. Any messages go to an in box, thus allowing messages to be left in confidence. I would like to know more about a certain angry person, but only if you are willing - no pressure at all.
The venerable cybernana showing that it is important to tell the truth and correct mistakes..
Actually, I must correct what I have posted. David was required to wear glasses, it was on his licence. However, he was able to drive without them (not legally of course) and evidence was given that he was occasionally seen doing just that.
Edited by cybernana at 7:46 am, Mon 22 Nov
Quotecybernana (582 ) 7:45 am, Mon 22 Nov #30662
If only one of the hangbainer twisted sisters had the ability to admit a mistake, that might even make their lies more understandable. Consider Ralph Taylor completely silent on his lies about the blood in the barrel, and DCameron unable to comment about her lies of seeing photos on non-existant scratches and the list goes on and on.
Edited by cybernana at 7:46 am, Mon 22 Nov
Quotecybernana (582 ) 7:45 am, Mon 22 Nov #30662
If only one of the hangbainer twisted sisters had the ability to admit a mistake, that might even make their lies more understandable. Consider Ralph Taylor completely silent on his lies about the blood in the barrel, and DCameron unable to comment about her lies of seeing photos on non-existant scratches and the list goes on and on.
Retard Rachael, 'time is not my friend..'
goes for it again...
Perhaps the 'scab' came off, I am sure you are an expert on 'scabs', someone has to be, wasn't there conflicting 'expert' evidence, not based on a photo?
Quotegoldnkiwi (609 ) 12:28 pm, Mon 22 Nov #30672
And you Rachael are an expert on bullsing, trying to rig elections, writing poems to dead donkeys, failing to be admitted to the bar, posting at 3am in the morning and suing your own father.
Perhaps the 'scab' came off, I am sure you are an expert on 'scabs', someone has to be, wasn't there conflicting 'expert' evidence, not based on a photo?
Quotegoldnkiwi (609 ) 12:28 pm, Mon 22 Nov #30672
And you Rachael are an expert on bullsing, trying to rig elections, writing poems to dead donkeys, failing to be admitted to the bar, posting at 3am in the morning and suing your own father.
Head pedo-supporter gains momentum......
Yes I accept that suicide was a possibility.Just the same as you or I winning Lotto next week.Possible but highly unlikely.Yes "possible " powder marks but no more than that.You need to understand the defences case was built largely on conjecture and hypothesis.No more and no less. thus the suicide is a theory,a scenario Not a physical hard fact.
Any maybe you can tell me for example where Robin's bloodied clothes were located and identified after he "disposed of them", when he changed "to meet his maker".The Defence imprisoned so to speak by their suicide "hypothesis".It is really ridiculous theory when you stop and think about it due to its own contradictions.
Edited by jeeves-50 at 2:04 pm, Mon 22 Nov
Yes, the head fiddler agrees suicide was possible, remarks about the powder spots but remains silent on the extensive blood in the barrel, the upward wound, and one of Robin's victim's blood on his right shoe. You are a piece of crap Taylor.
Any maybe you can tell me for example where Robin's bloodied clothes were located and identified after he "disposed of them", when he changed "to meet his maker".The Defence imprisoned so to speak by their suicide "hypothesis".It is really ridiculous theory when you stop and think about it due to its own contradictions.
Edited by jeeves-50 at 2:04 pm, Mon 22 Nov
Yes, the head fiddler agrees suicide was possible, remarks about the powder spots but remains silent on the extensive blood in the barrel, the upward wound, and one of Robin's victim's blood on his right shoe. You are a piece of crap Taylor.
Sunday, November 21, 2010
Those West Coasters: We've lost something... the ownership of risk.
Why can't those West Coast men go look for their mates. They know the risks, who should shut them out from their own, nobody, no one to stand in the way. Let them go if they want, the men that know and work the mine. Let them own their own risk and the breaking in their hearts.
Lindsay Kennard reaches the bottom of that cheap bottle of plonk..
Who are the reputable commentators who have discredited the PCA report and where are the reports, I have not seen any but that is not to say they don't exist. I would like to read the report as I have a very strong interest in the reports of the police so called complaints Authority. I have read the report but not knowing a lot about the background to the report and the complaints lodged so comparing the report and its conclusions against them.
Quotelinz4me (278 ) 7:08 pm, Sun 21 Nov #30631
Brilliant point linzbo, what was it again? I'm sure retard Rachael knows what you mean, if she wasn't going out with nina_concertina and sharing the ass breeding duties she could be wifey no 4 for you and there'd be no need to stoke her boiler to try and hide your fiddling techniques. Take two of them blue ones now.
Quotelinz4me (278 ) 7:08 pm, Sun 21 Nov #30631
Brilliant point linzbo, what was it again? I'm sure retard Rachael knows what you mean, if she wasn't going out with nina_concertina and sharing the ass breeding duties she could be wifey no 4 for you and there'd be no need to stoke her boiler to try and hide your fiddling techniques. Take two of them blue ones now.
Is dopey sophy connected to Kirkmaiden?
Could it have started with the 'anonymous' Bob Smith who signed the petition as William Rodie who posted on TM as kirkmaiden the c@p obsessive, later banned for stalking and defaming? Is William really Bill Rodie using his daughters account to post as dopey sophy? Should Bill Rodie's name go on the list of outed stalkers and defamers? Does Bill Rodie imagine himself to be the daughter of the Irish king when in fact he is only a bee keeper with gender difficulties?
Head pedo-pal Ralph Taylor has returned...
trying to call Joe Karam a liar again and having been caught out in every attempt so far.
Ok let's move onto to that "sizable bruise" (20mm) that Karam spoke about in the Radio Live debate.Or maybe the disappearance and whereabouts of Robin's bloodied clothes he got changed out of "to meet his maker".
Quotejeeves-50 (3 ) 1:33 pm, Sun 21 Nov #30612
Here's the bruise diddle fiddler....
Dr. Dempster
Evidence in Chief page 1603 line 12-15
"an abrasion 20 mm in diameter with a surrounding bruise 20mm in diameter"
Line 20
"I formed the opinion that it was a relatively recent bruise"
XXM page 1699, line 21-25
Q. But thats a fair way of putting it isnt it, even with hystology we probably cant tell whether its within a few minutes or up to 12 hours, we just dont know?
A. Thats correct
Crown witness patholgist Dr Thompson
XXM page 1796
Line 22.
Q. Have you seen photo 59 before?
A. No I havent
then referred to the same injury he says at line 31- 33
Q. it seems to be quite recent doesnt it?
A. Yes its - its moist and hasnt got a scab on it
Q. Right, indicating?
A. A recent injury the last 6 to 12 hours.
I've posted it before, actually about the time when you were calling the blood in the barrel a myth, and the strip search and intimate samples a myth, and somebody else's dna on daddy's right shoe a myth or lie. All that led to Stockdale doing a runner and making you head daddy diddle fiddler - so fiddle with that you pervo, show yours to urbopervo and he'll show you his you lying sicko hate-siter. Where is urbopervo, busy on the phone?
Ok let's move onto to that "sizable bruise" (20mm) that Karam spoke about in the Radio Live debate.Or maybe the disappearance and whereabouts of Robin's bloodied clothes he got changed out of "to meet his maker".
Quotejeeves-50 (3 ) 1:33 pm, Sun 21 Nov #30612
Here's the bruise diddle fiddler....
Dr. Dempster
Evidence in Chief page 1603 line 12-15
"an abrasion 20 mm in diameter with a surrounding bruise 20mm in diameter"
Line 20
"I formed the opinion that it was a relatively recent bruise"
XXM page 1699, line 21-25
Q. But thats a fair way of putting it isnt it, even with hystology we probably cant tell whether its within a few minutes or up to 12 hours, we just dont know?
A. Thats correct
Crown witness patholgist Dr Thompson
XXM page 1796
Line 22.
Q. Have you seen photo 59 before?
A. No I havent
then referred to the same injury he says at line 31- 33
Q. it seems to be quite recent doesnt it?
A. Yes its - its moist and hasnt got a scab on it
Q. Right, indicating?
A. A recent injury the last 6 to 12 hours.
I've posted it before, actually about the time when you were calling the blood in the barrel a myth, and the strip search and intimate samples a myth, and somebody else's dna on daddy's right shoe a myth or lie. All that led to Stockdale doing a runner and making you head daddy diddle fiddler - so fiddle with that you pervo, show yours to urbopervo and he'll show you his you lying sicko hate-siter. Where is urbopervo, busy on the phone?
Oh look, fiddler on the roof Lindsay Kennard, thinks
Robin Bain was a female.....
Age Related Changes That Affect Bladder Function
The prostate gland in an infant boy is small but grows large enough by puberty to assist with ejaculation. With growth, the prostate gland provides further support for the pelvic floor and urethral resistance. When a girl reaches puberty, the structures of her pelvic floor mature. Estrogen hormone receptors of the urethra and pelvic floor in women help maintain pelvic floor tone and increase urethral resistance.
In men up to the age of 40, the prostate gland grows slowly and few voiding problems occur. After the age of 40 to 45 and into the seventh, eighth, or even ninth decade, the growth of the prostate gland accelerates. A change in the balance of hormones in aging men alters the prostate gland. With prostate enlargement, the base of the bladder can become distorted, and obstructing tissue can cause increasing urethral resistance. Voiding patterns vary, depending on the severity of the obstruction. Prostatism can occur, a condition marked by symptoms of frequency, urgency, and nocturia. If the obstruction continues, the bladder may not be able to empty and urinary retention can occur.
Childbirth, especially repeated deliveries, can either temporarily or permanently distort or traumatize the pelvic floor and urethral anatomy in women. However, the pelvic ligaments, muscles, and urethra are stretched during pregnancy and become lax with time especially after menopause. After menopause, levels of estrogen in the body decrease, causing the structure of the pelvic floor to atrophy and the urethral mucosa to become thin and friable. Decreasing urethral tone and mucosal coaptation further diminish urethral resistance and significant changes can lead to urinary stress incontinence. In addition, the altered urethral mucosa is more susceptible to infection.
Normal changes associated with aging combined with certain pathophysiologic conditions predisposes women to urinary incontinence. Regardless of the presence or absence of incontinence, the aging genitourinary system is physiologically altered in these ways:
*
o Bladder capacity is diminished;
o Quantity of residual urine is increased;
o Bladder contractions become uninhibited (detrusor hyperreflexia overactive bladder);
o Desire to urinate is delayed; and
o Majority of urine production occurs at rest.
References
Newman, DK. The Urinary Incontinence Sourcebook. Lowell House. 1999.
Quotelinz4me (278 ) 11:45 am, Sun 21 Nov #30604
Listen Kennard you pervert idiot. Robin Bain was daddy bain, not mummy bain, and you are daddy kennard who wants to be mummy kennard but mummy kennard (one of them because there have been 3 that all left you) said that you had been a naughty daddy kennard in the same way rotten robin was a naughty daddy bain but was never pregnant.
I know how extremely thick you are, not even able to comprehend that daddy bain may have already been to the toilet that morning but retaining 400mm of urine. Even your information above shows that to be a possibility. But overall fiddler ken, the problem you need to deal with is that upward trajectory shot, the extensive blood inside the barrel and one of the victims dna being found on dear daddy's shoe instead of all this pissing about. Go take a big long swig of that cheap sherry kent sent you, pop a couple of green ones, kiss your dog and then go jump in the lake.
PS. When are you going to post the page number in Joe Karam's book where he called Millie a planter?
Age Related Changes That Affect Bladder Function
The prostate gland in an infant boy is small but grows large enough by puberty to assist with ejaculation. With growth, the prostate gland provides further support for the pelvic floor and urethral resistance. When a girl reaches puberty, the structures of her pelvic floor mature. Estrogen hormone receptors of the urethra and pelvic floor in women help maintain pelvic floor tone and increase urethral resistance.
In men up to the age of 40, the prostate gland grows slowly and few voiding problems occur. After the age of 40 to 45 and into the seventh, eighth, or even ninth decade, the growth of the prostate gland accelerates. A change in the balance of hormones in aging men alters the prostate gland. With prostate enlargement, the base of the bladder can become distorted, and obstructing tissue can cause increasing urethral resistance. Voiding patterns vary, depending on the severity of the obstruction. Prostatism can occur, a condition marked by symptoms of frequency, urgency, and nocturia. If the obstruction continues, the bladder may not be able to empty and urinary retention can occur.
Childbirth, especially repeated deliveries, can either temporarily or permanently distort or traumatize the pelvic floor and urethral anatomy in women. However, the pelvic ligaments, muscles, and urethra are stretched during pregnancy and become lax with time especially after menopause. After menopause, levels of estrogen in the body decrease, causing the structure of the pelvic floor to atrophy and the urethral mucosa to become thin and friable. Decreasing urethral tone and mucosal coaptation further diminish urethral resistance and significant changes can lead to urinary stress incontinence. In addition, the altered urethral mucosa is more susceptible to infection.
Normal changes associated with aging combined with certain pathophysiologic conditions predisposes women to urinary incontinence. Regardless of the presence or absence of incontinence, the aging genitourinary system is physiologically altered in these ways:
*
o Bladder capacity is diminished;
o Quantity of residual urine is increased;
o Bladder contractions become uninhibited (detrusor hyperreflexia overactive bladder);
o Desire to urinate is delayed; and
o Majority of urine production occurs at rest.
References
Newman, DK. The Urinary Incontinence Sourcebook. Lowell House. 1999.
Quotelinz4me (278 ) 11:45 am, Sun 21 Nov #30604
Listen Kennard you pervert idiot. Robin Bain was daddy bain, not mummy bain, and you are daddy kennard who wants to be mummy kennard but mummy kennard (one of them because there have been 3 that all left you) said that you had been a naughty daddy kennard in the same way rotten robin was a naughty daddy bain but was never pregnant.
I know how extremely thick you are, not even able to comprehend that daddy bain may have already been to the toilet that morning but retaining 400mm of urine. Even your information above shows that to be a possibility. But overall fiddler ken, the problem you need to deal with is that upward trajectory shot, the extensive blood inside the barrel and one of the victims dna being found on dear daddy's shoe instead of all this pissing about. Go take a big long swig of that cheap sherry kent sent you, pop a couple of green ones, kiss your dog and then go jump in the lake.
PS. When are you going to post the page number in Joe Karam's book where he called Millie a planter?
Earth to Ash....
Feel free to send a message here that you are okay Ash. I know urbanhyms posted some details about you and another TM poster on Thursday night. There was also a link to that on Annette Curran's hatesite that was quickly deleted as well. I also know that shortly after somebody received a threatening call from one of the hate-siters. I feel confident that you would not be subdued into silence by these mongrels Ash. You will know that there is power in keeping on the front foot against the hate-site scumbags. Myself and others hold extensive information about a large number of them, some which is in the hands of the authorities so there is little to be afraid of and the event with urbanhyms is already catalogued and being looked into. The more mistakes they make in anger or stupidity the more there is to crush them with. I warned their big 'boss' ages ago that they had been infiltrated but not content with that they keep supplying information and fall into error. You got to love them for their stupidity and gutlessness.
The stakes increase.....
The stakes increase.....
Saturday, November 20, 2010
nina_concertina...and rachael ass
have joined together to form an ass and arse band. Dickleberry wants to be on top fearing that she could be suffocated by the spread of nina_s such wide arse that when she travels to Australia she has to go as deck cargo and can't manage to fit inside the 5 metre wide boarding ramp tunnel so needs to be lifted on by a crane. They'll make a lovely couple and no doubt share the ass donkey breeding duties.
In the absence of Stockdale (runaway) the role of chief kiddie - fiddler falls into the welcome embrace of brother fiddler Ralph Taylor...
As is his habit Taylor searches in the past, invariably pre-trial to find information helpful to his persecuting cause and to attempt to 'free' the name of Robin Bain from the cloak of child molester that shall inevitably follow while any memory of him remains.
This rehashed nonsense from Taylor...
I wanted to have a look at the notion promoted by Cyber,te,project etc that the police investigation at the very start on the morning of the 20th of June 1994 set about as part of an orchestrated conspiracy to "stitch" or frame David Bain. I will focus on the "planted" lens theory:
" Since Karam is insistent about his lens theory, it's worth noting what would have had to happen for Weir to plant it; Weir would have needed to know Bain habitually wore glasses. (He wore none when police arrived; his own were being repaired.) Weir also had to know that the damaged glasses in Bain's room we re either his, or useful to him, when he arrived at , Every Street, some hours after his colleagues did . Knowing this in advance, Weir would have had to discover the damaged lens, which was missing from the glasses frame, and then secretly plant it - though the first thing he did when he took control of the scene was have photos and video recordings taken. What's more, Weir had to have made up his mind by the time he arrived - he'd have no chance to move the lens later, when the visual record had been made - that (DAVID)Bain was the guilty man. But police admit Robin Bain was their suspect for the first two days. Karam overlooks the fact the policeman who stayed with Bain from the moment police arrived saw the damaged glasses then, minus their lens. (in david's room) Bain himself offers no satisfactory explanation for any of this,and Karam offers no explanation as to why Weir might have wanted to set Bain up."
I am indebted to the North and South article by Rosemary Mcleod on Joe Karam and the Bain murders.As he offers no satisfactory explanation maybe cyber would like to try.I know the Ian Wishart article will probably come up but that in itself cannot explain the police actions on the morning of the 20th. Certainly a fertile and happy hunting ground for Holocaust,9/11,moon landing deniers and theorists etc.

Edited by jeeves-50 at 10:05 am, Fri 19 Nov
Quotejeeves-50 (3 ) 10:02 am, Fri 19 Nov #30449
He returns to the 'vaunted' opinion of Rosemary McLeod's discredited piece that she settled a defamation suit over fully knowledgeable of the fact that her 'opinion' was nothing more than one sided nonsense. Worth looking at again for those missing structures to bridge the gap between truth and the motivation of those that seek to hide it.
Of course Weir need not have known on his arrival at Every Street that David Bain wore glasses, in fact by sequence of events he need not have known for several more hours or even days before he found the 'golden bullet' piece of evidence. This 'find' despite that other officers, tasked with the job, had already searched the room. McLeod rehashes the now disproved theory that dear daddy was being treated as the suspect yet we know that it was his son, David, that was strip searched and had intimate samples taken. In the garbled mind of McLeod or Taylor clearly witnesses or potential witnesses, indeed victims are strip searched and samples taken from them for forensic testing to determine if they may have recently had sex with any of the victims, while the suspect is 'excused' the formality.
Stupid ass McLeod presents the idea that Weir couldn't have planted the lens because he had the scene photographed.... 'though the first thing he did when he took control of the scene was have photos and video recordings taken. What's more, Weir had to have made up his mind by the time he arrived - he'd have no chance to move the lens later, when the visual record had been made - that (DAVID)Bain was the guilty man.'... When of course the lens was not shown in the photographs, but was recorded on Weir's job sheet (and remember his search was 'after hours' and beyond his role as OIC of the scene) as being found under a ski boot. Later of course Weir did identify the lens (also said to be a trick of light) from a photo and, in absolute contrast to his own notes, it was out in the open on the floor. It's common knowledge that Weir admitted misleading the Court about the location of the lens and this formed part of the Actual Miscarriage of Justice that the Privy Council found.
This entire idea that Weir was somehow estopped from realising the significance of what a 'suddenly' found lens (remember officers searching the room for many days had not found it) was is absolute nonsense, rudimentary, unmitigated claptrap - a manufactured myth that defies common sense or logic. This all or nothing approach taken by McLeod is critically flawed and it is no wonder she surrendered the point once brought to task.
And you Taylor, fiddler, are being brought to task. Your time of persecution and covering up fiddling is coming to an end. I note your sudden silence on Daddy's blood filling the barrel and on the blood of one of his victims being found on his right shoe, and of David being stripped searched and no scratches found on his chest. Speaking of chest, why don't you come clean and tell the world why you need to hide the fact that daddy was a fiddler, have you made some pledge to some organisation to do so? Get it off your chest man, you are a true dog - you lie, day in and day out, when proved to be a liar you simply move on to the next lie or piece of propaganda but now you are getting hauled in Taylor.
This rehashed nonsense from Taylor...
I wanted to have a look at the notion promoted by Cyber,te,project etc that the police investigation at the very start on the morning of the 20th of June 1994 set about as part of an orchestrated conspiracy to "stitch" or frame David Bain. I will focus on the "planted" lens theory:
" Since Karam is insistent about his lens theory, it's worth noting what would have had to happen for Weir to plant it; Weir would have needed to know Bain habitually wore glasses. (He wore none when police arrived; his own were being repaired.) Weir also had to know that the damaged glasses in Bain's room we re either his, or useful to him, when he arrived at , Every Street, some hours after his colleagues did . Knowing this in advance, Weir would have had to discover the damaged lens, which was missing from the glasses frame, and then secretly plant it - though the first thing he did when he took control of the scene was have photos and video recordings taken. What's more, Weir had to have made up his mind by the time he arrived - he'd have no chance to move the lens later, when the visual record had been made - that (DAVID)Bain was the guilty man. But police admit Robin Bain was their suspect for the first two days. Karam overlooks the fact the policeman who stayed with Bain from the moment police arrived saw the damaged glasses then, minus their lens. (in david's room) Bain himself offers no satisfactory explanation for any of this,and Karam offers no explanation as to why Weir might have wanted to set Bain up."
I am indebted to the North and South article by Rosemary Mcleod on Joe Karam and the Bain murders.As he offers no satisfactory explanation maybe cyber would like to try.I know the Ian Wishart article will probably come up but that in itself cannot explain the police actions on the morning of the 20th. Certainly a fertile and happy hunting ground for Holocaust,9/11,moon landing deniers and theorists etc.

Edited by jeeves-50 at 10:05 am, Fri 19 Nov
Quotejeeves-50 (3 ) 10:02 am, Fri 19 Nov #30449
He returns to the 'vaunted' opinion of Rosemary McLeod's discredited piece that she settled a defamation suit over fully knowledgeable of the fact that her 'opinion' was nothing more than one sided nonsense. Worth looking at again for those missing structures to bridge the gap between truth and the motivation of those that seek to hide it.
Of course Weir need not have known on his arrival at Every Street that David Bain wore glasses, in fact by sequence of events he need not have known for several more hours or even days before he found the 'golden bullet' piece of evidence. This 'find' despite that other officers, tasked with the job, had already searched the room. McLeod rehashes the now disproved theory that dear daddy was being treated as the suspect yet we know that it was his son, David, that was strip searched and had intimate samples taken. In the garbled mind of McLeod or Taylor clearly witnesses or potential witnesses, indeed victims are strip searched and samples taken from them for forensic testing to determine if they may have recently had sex with any of the victims, while the suspect is 'excused' the formality.
Stupid ass McLeod presents the idea that Weir couldn't have planted the lens because he had the scene photographed.... 'though the first thing he did when he took control of the scene was have photos and video recordings taken. What's more, Weir had to have made up his mind by the time he arrived - he'd have no chance to move the lens later, when the visual record had been made - that (DAVID)Bain was the guilty man.'... When of course the lens was not shown in the photographs, but was recorded on Weir's job sheet (and remember his search was 'after hours' and beyond his role as OIC of the scene) as being found under a ski boot. Later of course Weir did identify the lens (also said to be a trick of light) from a photo and, in absolute contrast to his own notes, it was out in the open on the floor. It's common knowledge that Weir admitted misleading the Court about the location of the lens and this formed part of the Actual Miscarriage of Justice that the Privy Council found.
This entire idea that Weir was somehow estopped from realising the significance of what a 'suddenly' found lens (remember officers searching the room for many days had not found it) was is absolute nonsense, rudimentary, unmitigated claptrap - a manufactured myth that defies common sense or logic. This all or nothing approach taken by McLeod is critically flawed and it is no wonder she surrendered the point once brought to task.
And you Taylor, fiddler, are being brought to task. Your time of persecution and covering up fiddling is coming to an end. I note your sudden silence on Daddy's blood filling the barrel and on the blood of one of his victims being found on his right shoe, and of David being stripped searched and no scratches found on his chest. Speaking of chest, why don't you come clean and tell the world why you need to hide the fact that daddy was a fiddler, have you made some pledge to some organisation to do so? Get it off your chest man, you are a true dog - you lie, day in and day out, when proved to be a liar you simply move on to the next lie or piece of propaganda but now you are getting hauled in Taylor.
Introducing Trevor William Fox... the much despised, stalker and liar - luckytrader...
Another stalker revealed. A step closer to understanding the mechanics and set up construction of the hate sites. Anybody who can reveal any information about this individual please do so, confidentiality of source guaranteed. I particularly want to know any information at all linking this 'man' to The Press, or attempts he may have made at intimidating and outing the Chch jury or any other individual. Important issues lie at stake, nzers need to know how so much misinformation can be supplied to the public over such an extended period of time by people already aware of the truth. Nzers need to know what bridges the gap, between on the one hand having an opinion and the right to for free voice, and on the other knowing the truth but being willing to subvert it and act in a criminal way to subvert not only the right for the public to have knowledge and be fairly informed, but to at all times have the right to make fair and informed decisions arising from accurate and truthful information, logic and common sense without pressure, being stalked or bullied.
The missing gap continues to be bridged and may one day be seen as a story within itself as to not only how a man is setup for false imprisonment and persecution but additionally what constitutes the components, and motivation to continue to harass him with accusations and lies when due process has finally found its way.
A message for you trader, there's more to come, and it will be out in the open with more courtesy and power than you could ever conjure from the dark.
The missing gap continues to be bridged and may one day be seen as a story within itself as to not only how a man is setup for false imprisonment and persecution but additionally what constitutes the components, and motivation to continue to harass him with accusations and lies when due process has finally found its way.
A message for you trader, there's more to come, and it will be out in the open with more courtesy and power than you could ever conjure from the dark.
Friday, November 19, 2010
Dear Goobergoof and cowpatkal,
I repeat my thanks for the information on who arsew... trevortrader is. However, as you will understand I am unable to intercede on your behalf in anyway that might be seen as you being rewarded for doing the proper thing and shopping one of your mates, who is is noted, is an unusual chap isn't he but who well characterises those few that populate your filthy, hateful sites.
It's beyond my capacity to render your names forward with a plea of mercy that you don't get enjoined in the High Court proceedings because I am not involved in them, and besides that I think you deserve all which may come your way. You are both, after all, stalkers, liars and apologists for paedophilia. You have done, and are recorded as having done so, some very disgusting things against people who haven't been conned by your hate campaign, and even against their families and children. Remember mentioning the children Kalvonitch you dog?
Anyway woof woof, take some worm tablets.
It's beyond my capacity to render your names forward with a plea of mercy that you don't get enjoined in the High Court proceedings because I am not involved in them, and besides that I think you deserve all which may come your way. You are both, after all, stalkers, liars and apologists for paedophilia. You have done, and are recorded as having done so, some very disgusting things against people who haven't been conned by your hate campaign, and even against their families and children. Remember mentioning the children Kalvonitch you dog?
Anyway woof woof, take some worm tablets.
Palace Hotel in Auckland what happened?
An engineer made a plan for the renovations which included removing some floors, and an excavation of 5 metres. The council gave approval for the work to go ahead but did not require any strengthening or bracing of the brick facade while the work took place. If the fragility of brick to vibration is not known to current generations, particularly after the Christchurch earthquakes, it would be astounding, for engineers and a Council to not know borders on insanity and gross incompetence to the highest level. Anybody living in any sort of home which boarders a road on which heavy traffic travels feels vibration, and that vibration is dampened by soft soil, clay or other similar substrate, but concrete or rock is a conduit for the vibration.
If a hole is dug in the ground the faces of the excavation are the weak point until retained in some fashion, rain water or underground water table add to the weakness, so does vibration. The Palace was internally stripped, the floors that where removed weakened the integrity of the brick because they were working as a horizontal brace. An unbraced brick wall has no strength because unlike a block wall has no poured concrete centres of reinforcing steel pinning it to the foundation.
Today a council spokesman said it was not 'known' what caused the problem. Mayor Brown gave the order for it to be demolished despite the one of the owner Cho saying he wanted to time to have it assessed by another engineer. Christchurch was able to have building properly assessed it seems without haste using a range of experts and specialists. But the Auckland Council felt there was no time to do so, having already apparently failed to ensure the proper steps were taken and enforced during the renovation. Mr Cho told the owner of the demo company and the council engineer that he is going to sue them. I hope he does.
If a hole is dug in the ground the faces of the excavation are the weak point until retained in some fashion, rain water or underground water table add to the weakness, so does vibration. The Palace was internally stripped, the floors that where removed weakened the integrity of the brick because they were working as a horizontal brace. An unbraced brick wall has no strength because unlike a block wall has no poured concrete centres of reinforcing steel pinning it to the foundation.
Today a council spokesman said it was not 'known' what caused the problem. Mayor Brown gave the order for it to be demolished despite the one of the owner Cho saying he wanted to time to have it assessed by another engineer. Christchurch was able to have building properly assessed it seems without haste using a range of experts and specialists. But the Auckland Council felt there was no time to do so, having already apparently failed to ensure the proper steps were taken and enforced during the renovation. Mr Cho told the owner of the demo company and the council engineer that he is going to sue them. I hope he does.
Breaking news from the henhouse from Goodnewsguy.
So far I've tracked down two likely Trevor William such and such and William such such in the hen house and I ain't foxing. No way am I foxing. The first one is a gridiron star so I guess that rules out luckydimtwit. But the second one could be more fruitful, in Brazil there is gay porn star by the same name as old lucky. Now I think it's recognised that luckydimtwat has been on the receiving end of things for some time, and it is also notable his unusual relationship with Stockdale and Taylor. Equally, another poster has presented the idea that one of lucky's closest 'buddies' ervynpurvyn still lives at home with mummy. It's something to go on anyway until Annie and gluebrains OBrien cough up with the correct surname and stop teasing everybody.
One of the worst stalkers....
Luckytrader, a kiddie-fiddler supporter, seems his middle name is William.
Now old Trevor William stalked my family along with Stockdale and another arseh... wanakafan over on Curran's dirtpile. All I need to do is find out that surname and he can be added to the list of 'outed' stalkers - won't that be fun Trev? Want to give us a clue arsewi..?
Thanks for the info Annie and Glenda I knew you'd come to the party once the pressure went on. Just tell me that last name and we'll make a little commemoration to him arsew.... before turning attention to the others.
Now old Trevor William stalked my family along with Stockdale and another arseh... wanakafan over on Curran's dirtpile. All I need to do is find out that surname and he can be added to the list of 'outed' stalkers - won't that be fun Trev? Want to give us a clue arsewi..?
Thanks for the info Annie and Glenda I knew you'd come to the party once the pressure went on. Just tell me that last name and we'll make a little commemoration to him arsew.... before turning attention to the others.
Thursday, November 18, 2010
urbanhyms dimtwot you stalker...
Come out urby, don't sneak around in the bushes making phone calls and threatening people. Come on out scumbucket, bring your runaway girlfriends with you urbypervy pedo-pal. Bring out your fiddling and see how you go.
It's all out war between dopey sophy and urbydimsim..
They want to supplant the two previous biggest bsers on TM superplonk and nina_concertina how does your garden grow, as the champion bser of all time. Dopey sophy can see the blood in a picture.
I don't know, I have not read that particular part of the transcript of which there is over 3000 pages, have you? if you have tell us what it says, I can tell you there are also pictures of the blood on the machine showing Davids palm print you can see the red color, David certainly had no argument with the evidence of blood all over items in the laundry, which is understandable as he did wash all the blood drenched items that the killer had worn.
Quotesophier8 (1 ) 8:20 am, Wed 17 Nov #30124
But alas the scientist who gave evidence about the partial print had a different story. Scientists these days.
sophier8 wrote:
Mr Lodge said a partial bloody hand print was found on the top of the machine, while blood was also found on the side of the machine, http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&obj
ectid=10563668
as posted before
Detective Jones, the fingerprint expert who originally inspected the washing machine, testified that the palm print was not visible, and could only be seen through the use of a poly light
Quotete-aroha (67 ) 3:47 pm, Thu 18 Nov #30312
There, there dopey did you lose your job in the seven dwarfs and are out of work so thought you would do a bit of hate-siting the side.
But urvypervy is coming up the rear with these ones....
ash204 wrote:
GOT YA URBY SPINS, CUT AND PASTED BEFORE DELETION!
BYE BYE!!
LOL, I don't have access to delete it sorry.
Quoteurbanhymns (130 ) 5:36 pm, Wed 17 Nov #30183
It definitely wasn't he or she that deleted his/her post, it might be another one of the seven dwarfs that's out of work and looking for a job in deletions.
But then this out of pervy's customised clap trap of horse manure, mixed with donkey's dos.
I'm not talking about deleting my posts, there is no question that I deleted those, how could there be.
Quoteurbanhymns (130 ) 9:23 pm, Wed 17 Nov #30279
So is revealed the bsing contest going on. Things have taken a rather asinine turn since retard Rachael's little poems for dead donkeys became a number one request on counterspin, all the little wannabe asses are putting up such a performance but I wish they wouldn't do those things to themselves and the donkeys in the children's sandpit. It's disgusting.
I don't know, I have not read that particular part of the transcript of which there is over 3000 pages, have you? if you have tell us what it says, I can tell you there are also pictures of the blood on the machine showing Davids palm print you can see the red color, David certainly had no argument with the evidence of blood all over items in the laundry, which is understandable as he did wash all the blood drenched items that the killer had worn.
Quotesophier8 (1 ) 8:20 am, Wed 17 Nov #30124
But alas the scientist who gave evidence about the partial print had a different story. Scientists these days.
sophier8 wrote:
Mr Lodge said a partial bloody hand print was found on the top of the machine, while blood was also found on the side of the machine, http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&obj
ectid=10563668
as posted before
Detective Jones, the fingerprint expert who originally inspected the washing machine, testified that the palm print was not visible, and could only be seen through the use of a poly light
Quotete-aroha (67 ) 3:47 pm, Thu 18 Nov #30312
There, there dopey did you lose your job in the seven dwarfs and are out of work so thought you would do a bit of hate-siting the side.
But urvypervy is coming up the rear with these ones....
ash204 wrote:
GOT YA URBY SPINS, CUT AND PASTED BEFORE DELETION!
BYE BYE!!
LOL, I don't have access to delete it sorry.
Quoteurbanhymns (130 ) 5:36 pm, Wed 17 Nov #30183
It definitely wasn't he or she that deleted his/her post, it might be another one of the seven dwarfs that's out of work and looking for a job in deletions.
But then this out of pervy's customised clap trap of horse manure, mixed with donkey's dos.
I'm not talking about deleting my posts, there is no question that I deleted those, how could there be.
Quoteurbanhymns (130 ) 9:23 pm, Wed 17 Nov #30279
So is revealed the bsing contest going on. Things have taken a rather asinine turn since retard Rachael's little poems for dead donkeys became a number one request on counterspin, all the little wannabe asses are putting up such a performance but I wish they wouldn't do those things to themselves and the donkeys in the children's sandpit. It's disgusting.
Wednesday, November 17, 2010
Things have certainly gone down hill since it has
been confirmed that dear daddy's blood was all over the inside of the barrel after he shot himself. All the twisted sisters said there was no blood in the barrel, now they've moved away from that and gone quiet about that and other evidence, but it doesn't matter how far they've moved - daddy left all the proof in the world against himself, daddy was good like that.
Face it folks, daddy was a fiddler who took his family out before he could be brought before the Courts. He was a very jealous and possessive man who didn't like to be excluded from the fruits of his crop. Even his pedo-supporters numbers are dwindling, just down to the odd dick and donkey.
Face it folks, daddy was a fiddler who took his family out before he could be brought before the Courts. He was a very jealous and possessive man who didn't like to be excluded from the fruits of his crop. Even his pedo-supporters numbers are dwindling, just down to the odd dick and donkey.
dirty trevor arsew... wants to get into schools..
We should be looking at ways to avoid another tragedy. Perhaps we could sponsor Mr Kent Parker to go on a speaking tour around NZ schools in case a kid is on the edge listening to the black hands telling him to terminate his family. Troubled kids are a big problem, and the last thing NZ needs is another terminator loose.
Quotelucky_trader (1238 ) 12:55 pm, Wed 17 Nov #30165
Has Trevor let the cat out of the bag, is this one of the reasons for the persecution of David and the attempted cover up of the behaviour of Robin, the man whose blood filled the rifle barrel?
Is Trevor so deranged that he thinks members of hate-sites where there is sympathy and apology for paedophilia acts, sites that have openly stalked people opposing their ideas including a jury, where the principals face almost 200 charges in the Auckland High Court should be allowed near vulnerable children? Is that the point of Kent's exercise? Does Kent Parker want to be another Bert Potter with Trevor his right hand 'man?' Would the public allow it?
Quotelucky_trader (1238 ) 12:55 pm, Wed 17 Nov #30165
Has Trevor let the cat out of the bag, is this one of the reasons for the persecution of David and the attempted cover up of the behaviour of Robin, the man whose blood filled the rifle barrel?
Is Trevor so deranged that he thinks members of hate-sites where there is sympathy and apology for paedophilia acts, sites that have openly stalked people opposing their ideas including a jury, where the principals face almost 200 charges in the Auckland High Court should be allowed near vulnerable children? Is that the point of Kent's exercise? Does Kent Parker want to be another Bert Potter with Trevor his right hand 'man?' Would the public allow it?
The 2nd generation of hangbainers are as dumb as the first, real dumb asses.
First trial testimony from David[ Were the glasses in your room, the frame and the lens, in your room on Sunday night? [David]No.
Can you account for their presence as found in your room by the Police on the Monday morning? [David] No I cannot account for that.]
Quotesophier8 (1 ) 8:37 am, Wed 17 Nov #30127
Dopey sophy above, sees something no once else can in two consistent statements by David, one - that the frame and lens weren't in his room on the Sunday night, and the consistent - that he could not account to the police for them being 'found' there the next morning. Brilliant dopey, I'm sure it makes some sense to you. Do yourself a favour and go on about Mrs Clarke, the holder the of the family fortune, or Michael Guest, the disbarred lawyer - that might make you feel better.
THEY WERE DB'S GLASSES! WORN BY DAVID! AND OF NO USE WHATSOEVER TO RB.
Quoteurbanhymns (130 ) 11:10 pm, Tue 16 Nov #30113
Urvinherman pops in to help. Except urvinherman doesn't know whose glasses they are.
Stop trying to defame urbanhymns by suggesting he is a liar if he takes you to court for defamation I will back him 100% he is not lieing he speaks with truth on this matter.
Quotesophier8 (1 ) 8:26 am, Wed 17 Nov #30125
Dopey sophy back to help the lying urvinherman. Threatening legal action.
correct me if I'm wrong here, Mr Sanderson was an optometrist, not an expert on injury and its causes or its effects.
Has he had and research peer reviewed and published on the effects to having glasses broken while being worn. If so he opinion might be of some relevance otherwise it is of as much as value as Donald Ducks on the importance of clear speech.
Quotelinz4me (278 ) 10:08 am, Wed 17 Nov #30140
Sensing difficulties, linzbinzo, takes another guzzle and two red ones and brings up Donald Duck.
ts amusing to me because you insist on believing that Robin committed incest when Iit is obvious that Laniet told bs stories, and with her own free will lived with Robin along with her freind Kyle, who said Laniet and Robin had a normal father daughter relationship. You chose to believe in this discredied story in yet ignore the fact that David told his lawyer and Aunty that he was wearing his mothers glasses etc. Just plain stupid Ash.
Quotesophier8 (1 ) 10:40 am, Wed 17 Nov #30145
Forgetting what she's already said, dopey sophy now says that they were Margaret's glasses and confirms that irvinherman is a liar afterall.
Just to change the subject: for a more concise example that the hangbainers are such bsers, they don't know if they're bsing themselves or if it's one of their mates.
They were worn by DB, he was reliant on them. They were found in disrepair with a missing lens found in Stephen’s room. This is the same lens, that his beady little eye would have stared through, looking down the scope at Stephen. Stephen gripped the barrel, only to be shot in the hand, in fending of the gun the scope would have propelled back into David, no doubt dislodging the lens.
Edited by urbanhymns at 11:28 pm, Tue 16 Nov
Quoteurbanhymns (130 ) 11:26 pm, Tue 16 Nov #30118
old erby has got a gunman looking through a scope in small room where they are of no use. It's called dramatic licence by bsing pedo-supporter.
And if you are shooting someone at point blank range you don't sight looking down a scope, ask David.
Quotesophier8 (1 ) 10:46 am, Wed 17 Nov #30148
Just to prove old erby really is a liar dopey sophy confirms it again.
And these idiots fiddlers expect to be taken seriously, because they said so. Oh sure.
Can you account for their presence as found in your room by the Police on the Monday morning? [David] No I cannot account for that.]
Quotesophier8 (1 ) 8:37 am, Wed 17 Nov #30127
Dopey sophy above, sees something no once else can in two consistent statements by David, one - that the frame and lens weren't in his room on the Sunday night, and the consistent - that he could not account to the police for them being 'found' there the next morning. Brilliant dopey, I'm sure it makes some sense to you. Do yourself a favour and go on about Mrs Clarke, the holder the of the family fortune, or Michael Guest, the disbarred lawyer - that might make you feel better.
THEY WERE DB'S GLASSES! WORN BY DAVID! AND OF NO USE WHATSOEVER TO RB.
Quoteurbanhymns (130 ) 11:10 pm, Tue 16 Nov #30113
Urvinherman pops in to help. Except urvinherman doesn't know whose glasses they are.
Stop trying to defame urbanhymns by suggesting he is a liar if he takes you to court for defamation I will back him 100% he is not lieing he speaks with truth on this matter.
Quotesophier8 (1 ) 8:26 am, Wed 17 Nov #30125
Dopey sophy back to help the lying urvinherman. Threatening legal action.
correct me if I'm wrong here, Mr Sanderson was an optometrist, not an expert on injury and its causes or its effects.
Has he had and research peer reviewed and published on the effects to having glasses broken while being worn. If so he opinion might be of some relevance otherwise it is of as much as value as Donald Ducks on the importance of clear speech.
Quotelinz4me (278 ) 10:08 am, Wed 17 Nov #30140
Sensing difficulties, linzbinzo, takes another guzzle and two red ones and brings up Donald Duck.
ts amusing to me because you insist on believing that Robin committed incest when Iit is obvious that Laniet told bs stories, and with her own free will lived with Robin along with her freind Kyle, who said Laniet and Robin had a normal father daughter relationship. You chose to believe in this discredied story in yet ignore the fact that David told his lawyer and Aunty that he was wearing his mothers glasses etc. Just plain stupid Ash.
Quotesophier8 (1 ) 10:40 am, Wed 17 Nov #30145
Forgetting what she's already said, dopey sophy now says that they were Margaret's glasses and confirms that irvinherman is a liar afterall.
Just to change the subject: for a more concise example that the hangbainers are such bsers, they don't know if they're bsing themselves or if it's one of their mates.
They were worn by DB, he was reliant on them. They were found in disrepair with a missing lens found in Stephen’s room. This is the same lens, that his beady little eye would have stared through, looking down the scope at Stephen. Stephen gripped the barrel, only to be shot in the hand, in fending of the gun the scope would have propelled back into David, no doubt dislodging the lens.
Edited by urbanhymns at 11:28 pm, Tue 16 Nov
Quoteurbanhymns (130 ) 11:26 pm, Tue 16 Nov #30118
old erby has got a gunman looking through a scope in small room where they are of no use. It's called dramatic licence by bsing pedo-supporter.
And if you are shooting someone at point blank range you don't sight looking down a scope, ask David.
Quotesophier8 (1 ) 10:46 am, Wed 17 Nov #30148
Just to prove old erby really is a liar dopey sophy confirms it again.
And these idiots fiddlers expect to be taken seriously, because they said so. Oh sure.
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
For dopey sophy and mama kent.
My letter to Trade Me....
Appreciating that the following appears on a TM opinion it however is not an opinion at all. Its clear propaganda and lies from a person who has likely been previously banned and who is a member of a hate-site. This person 'sophier' has, and continues to c&p from the hate-sites, having done so tens of times in the last few weeks alone.
The following post is totally defamatory to Joe Karam, David Bain and the defence team, this post purports as 'facts' a series of lies, leaving an uninformed reader to assume elements of deception presented by the defence in David Bain's trial. Before pointing out the lies in detail I will rightly bring attention to the fact that sophier, along with jeeves, luckytrader, linz4me, goldnkiwi, dcameron are all long term hate-sites members, all have a history of defaming Joe Karam on TM and elsewhere, sharing, at least between some of them, an apparent predilection or support of behaviour toward sexual activity with children or accusations of the same. A number of these posters according to TM's own records are also stalkers as defined under The Harassment Act 1997 and have been temporarily banned from TM for such activities in the past. These people's behaviour has been characterised and identified over a long period of time for using TM as a venue to spread hate messages about Joe Karam and others. The comments they make are not mistakes, opinions or anything of the sort, they are lies and misinformation presented and published in Public to destroy the reputation of David Bain and his legal team.
While sophier, as in this case below, may be the writer of the hate message and defamation TM however, remain the publisher. Unfortunately, it is to be noted that many board users or in fact casual readers could be influenced not only by the following lies but also by the tacit approval of TM and accept them as facts - that is a real danger, and one need only consider how attachment of 'I read it in the paper (message board)' brings, in this case at least, an undeserved respectability or credibility to a bunch of lies.
I am completely confident that should TM be taken to task over such as that below, TM has no chance of defending it as being truthful and no way of presenting a satisfactory result (helpful to TM) from the actual Court documents to establish that TM could credibility accept in good faith that the following is true.
In short:
There is overpowering forensic proof against Robin Bain.
There were no bloody fingerprints of David Bain found on the rifle.
David Bain did not have 'his brother's blood all over his T shirt or shorts.' etc.
I would like to point out to TM again, that moderation of the Bain threads is a relatively straight forward procedure, because all the hate-site members have been identified to TM and may officially be discovered to them at some point. The same people doing the same thing day in and day out, not random events but deliberate events by the same people directed from the same hate-sites. I have told TM previously that there is a lot of recorded material proving the conduct of these people. I understand some of it may be currently under investigation. These posters should be banned. Further, if TM wish to keep Bain threads going TM should become acquainted with the truth of the Bain case, the trial transcript etc and moderate accordingly - but foremost prevent hate-siters operating with apparent impunity on TM boards.
http://www.trademe.co.nz/Community/MessageBoard/Messages.aspx?id=343730&p=602&topic=7
In order for David to win on the BOP Robin has to be guilty on the BOP, with no evidence against him for murder that is impossible, David still has to explain how he got his brothers blood all over his T shirt, shorts, and Gondoliers shirt as well as leaving bloody fingerprints on the murder weapon, just to mention a fraction of the very good evidence for David to be the killer on the BOP.
Quote
sophier8 (1 ) 4:39 pm, Tue 16 Nov #30092
Yours etc
Appreciating that the following appears on a TM opinion it however is not an opinion at all. Its clear propaganda and lies from a person who has likely been previously banned and who is a member of a hate-site. This person 'sophier' has, and continues to c&p from the hate-sites, having done so tens of times in the last few weeks alone.
The following post is totally defamatory to Joe Karam, David Bain and the defence team, this post purports as 'facts' a series of lies, leaving an uninformed reader to assume elements of deception presented by the defence in David Bain's trial. Before pointing out the lies in detail I will rightly bring attention to the fact that sophier, along with jeeves, luckytrader, linz4me, goldnkiwi, dcameron are all long term hate-sites members, all have a history of defaming Joe Karam on TM and elsewhere, sharing, at least between some of them, an apparent predilection or support of behaviour toward sexual activity with children or accusations of the same. A number of these posters according to TM's own records are also stalkers as defined under The Harassment Act 1997 and have been temporarily banned from TM for such activities in the past. These people's behaviour has been characterised and identified over a long period of time for using TM as a venue to spread hate messages about Joe Karam and others. The comments they make are not mistakes, opinions or anything of the sort, they are lies and misinformation presented and published in Public to destroy the reputation of David Bain and his legal team.
While sophier, as in this case below, may be the writer of the hate message and defamation TM however, remain the publisher. Unfortunately, it is to be noted that many board users or in fact casual readers could be influenced not only by the following lies but also by the tacit approval of TM and accept them as facts - that is a real danger, and one need only consider how attachment of 'I read it in the paper (message board)' brings, in this case at least, an undeserved respectability or credibility to a bunch of lies.
I am completely confident that should TM be taken to task over such as that below, TM has no chance of defending it as being truthful and no way of presenting a satisfactory result (helpful to TM) from the actual Court documents to establish that TM could credibility accept in good faith that the following is true.
In short:
There is overpowering forensic proof against Robin Bain.
There were no bloody fingerprints of David Bain found on the rifle.
David Bain did not have 'his brother's blood all over his T shirt or shorts.' etc.
I would like to point out to TM again, that moderation of the Bain threads is a relatively straight forward procedure, because all the hate-site members have been identified to TM and may officially be discovered to them at some point. The same people doing the same thing day in and day out, not random events but deliberate events by the same people directed from the same hate-sites. I have told TM previously that there is a lot of recorded material proving the conduct of these people. I understand some of it may be currently under investigation. These posters should be banned. Further, if TM wish to keep Bain threads going TM should become acquainted with the truth of the Bain case, the trial transcript etc and moderate accordingly - but foremost prevent hate-siters operating with apparent impunity on TM boards.
http://www.trademe.co.nz/Community/MessageBoard/Messages.aspx?id=343730&p=602&topic=7
In order for David to win on the BOP Robin has to be guilty on the BOP, with no evidence against him for murder that is impossible, David still has to explain how he got his brothers blood all over his T shirt, shorts, and Gondoliers shirt as well as leaving bloody fingerprints on the murder weapon, just to mention a fraction of the very good evidence for David to be the killer on the BOP.
Quote
sophier8 (1 ) 4:39 pm, Tue 16 Nov #30092
Yours etc
Monday, November 15, 2010
Don't be a crybaby Mike Stockdale.
Don't do a runner like a big chicken.
I don't know about these modern restrictions on language Mike, they seem so boring - like you talking about Mrs Clarke all the time while wearing an undersized corset Mike.
'Corset Mike' doesn't that sound so lovely Michael? I bet you just love being known for that. It's all sweety, sweety. Two sugars please.
I reckon you never knew you were such a chicky, chicky, Michael, you must be so proud. Now that everybody knows what a big chicken you are, I might just pop out and water the daisies.
Daisy, daisy do, Michael how you? Fancy meeting you out in the garden looking like a sweet daisy chicken.
Daisy, daisy do.
I don't know about these modern restrictions on language Mike, they seem so boring - like you talking about Mrs Clarke all the time while wearing an undersized corset Mike.
'Corset Mike' doesn't that sound so lovely Michael? I bet you just love being known for that. It's all sweety, sweety. Two sugars please.
I reckon you never knew you were such a chicky, chicky, Michael, you must be so proud. Now that everybody knows what a big chicken you are, I might just pop out and water the daisies.
Daisy, daisy do, Michael how you? Fancy meeting you out in the garden looking like a sweet daisy chicken.
Daisy, daisy do.
Excuse me.
Dear Hate-sites,
Thanks for the continuing information, I actually had enough but with the continued leaking I'll need to draw the line lower across the page. Very interested to read what Mike has had to say, and to watch the panic. Hard to figure out isn't it dearies? Having a brain might help. So much information, so little time, heck, gosh and well, there you go.
Cheers
Your old Pal
Nos.
PS I'll give you a little clue. Don't look at the detail before you understand the construction. For an example look at the failed construction of the false case against David Bain, the evident flaws that caused it's collapse.
Thanks for the continuing information, I actually had enough but with the continued leaking I'll need to draw the line lower across the page. Very interested to read what Mike has had to say, and to watch the panic. Hard to figure out isn't it dearies? Having a brain might help. So much information, so little time, heck, gosh and well, there you go.
Cheers
Your old Pal
Nos.
PS I'll give you a little clue. Don't look at the detail before you understand the construction. For an example look at the failed construction of the false case against David Bain, the evident flaws that caused it's collapse.
What an idiot the pin up pedo accused Linz4me is.
He thinks that Joe Karam has bitten off more that he can chew. He's posted on TM about frailties in Joe's defamation case, that's the one against Kent Parker and Purkiss who have no lawyer and who are clueless. Linz4me changes that into a positive and cites cases residing before the Auckland and Wellington High Courts for years as though that has some connection to Joe Karam's case which is clearly proceeding in a timely fashion with expert Lawyers at the helm.
He even thinks that TM have turned against him because they won't do anything about this blog or others that have revealed that the hangbainers are a bunch of twisted nutters with suspect mating habits. Well dumbo Kennard, TM don't own this facility and I merely employ the opportunity to reveal you and your hate-sites mates on matters that you are all too gutless to sue me about because you know, as I stated at the beginning of this blog, that I have the proof, proof supplied by your bunch of nutters.
Just in case you are feeling down the dumps Kennard I should say that I and others made allowances for your 'condition' but that's long gone because you continued on with your filth and remained indistinguishable from the other mangy dogs you co-habitate with. One of those others that harboured concern about you actually offered you respect and wise counsel and you returned by stalking them. That's what an arse you are Kennard.
He even thinks that TM have turned against him because they won't do anything about this blog or others that have revealed that the hangbainers are a bunch of twisted nutters with suspect mating habits. Well dumbo Kennard, TM don't own this facility and I merely employ the opportunity to reveal you and your hate-sites mates on matters that you are all too gutless to sue me about because you know, as I stated at the beginning of this blog, that I have the proof, proof supplied by your bunch of nutters.
Just in case you are feeling down the dumps Kennard I should say that I and others made allowances for your 'condition' but that's long gone because you continued on with your filth and remained indistinguishable from the other mangy dogs you co-habitate with. One of those others that harboured concern about you actually offered you respect and wise counsel and you returned by stalking them. That's what an arse you are Kennard.
Get a brain Lindsay Kennard - Toreador told you.
Trademe has blocked JFRB from being saved to VMN since Friday I guess they don't want it known that they have joined the battle against their own members.
Quotelinz4me (278 ) 9:42 pm, Sun 14 Nov #29942
You and your arsew... mates started the battle against yourselves like complete dickhea... Don't blame TM for your stalking and defamation on the boards or using the boards to further your propaganda to persecute others. TM are running a business they're not responsible for halfwits from hate-sites that can't control their own mouths, carnal instincts or criminal harassment. Good to see TM's belated response and an indication that they are beginning to comprehend the law. Good to see the Law finding its way in to your hate-sites and covens.
There is more to come, there always was it's just that you bunch of pedo-lovers always thought if it didn't happen tomorrow it would never happen. You were all warned and laughed, there may well be other people laughing at you now. Get use to it. Remember Toreador? Salute Toreador.
Quotelinz4me (278 ) 9:42 pm, Sun 14 Nov #29942
You and your arsew... mates started the battle against yourselves like complete dickhea... Don't blame TM for your stalking and defamation on the boards or using the boards to further your propaganda to persecute others. TM are running a business they're not responsible for halfwits from hate-sites that can't control their own mouths, carnal instincts or criminal harassment. Good to see TM's belated response and an indication that they are beginning to comprehend the law. Good to see the Law finding its way in to your hate-sites and covens.
There is more to come, there always was it's just that you bunch of pedo-lovers always thought if it didn't happen tomorrow it would never happen. You were all warned and laughed, there may well be other people laughing at you now. Get use to it. Remember Toreador? Salute Toreador.
Sunday, November 14, 2010
luckyar.ewip. feeling the heat.
jmhb51 wrote:
Has anyone else had a warning? I haven't posted here for over three months.
Then on 9 Nov I posted 2 or 3 times in order to correct Cybernana on her poor English.
And I get a warning about defaming Karam? !
Yes. Me, too. I have hardly been posting anything - and have been very careful about anything I have posted. I have asked TM for an explanation as their message appears very odd and unwarranted.
Quotelucky_trader (1235 ) 1:20 pm, Sun 14 Nov #29909
'Very odd and unwarranted' take a look through the files of your posts you idiot. You should have been put out of your misery and banned last November toilettissue. The idiots look to what they haven't done for a few weeks and ignore what they have done for years - 'very odd.' Tell Kenty, it's just what he wanted to know.
Has anyone else had a warning? I haven't posted here for over three months.
Then on 9 Nov I posted 2 or 3 times in order to correct Cybernana on her poor English.
And I get a warning about defaming Karam? !
Yes. Me, too. I have hardly been posting anything - and have been very careful about anything I have posted. I have asked TM for an explanation as their message appears very odd and unwarranted.
Quotelucky_trader (1235 ) 1:20 pm, Sun 14 Nov #29909
'Very odd and unwarranted' take a look through the files of your posts you idiot. You should have been put out of your misery and banned last November toilettissue. The idiots look to what they haven't done for a few weeks and ignore what they have done for years - 'very odd.' Tell Kenty, it's just what he wanted to know.
More from Judgement of Heath J 9 November 2010
The Pleadings...
[39] Similarly, a Statement of Defence must plead explicitly any affirmative defence. When 'truth' is the basis of a defence, it is necessary to make it clear what is said to be true, so the plaintiff knows what case he or she has to meet. Where a defendant raises an imputation of misconduct against a plaintiff, the plaintiff ought to to be able to go to trial with knowledge of the acts which are alleged and which the defendant intends to rely to justify the imputation. Similarly, where defences of honest opinion and/or qualified privilege are raised, sufficient particulars must be given to inform the plaintiff of the basis on which the opinion is based, or the circumstances which give rise to a privileged occasion.
I would imagine this is where dear old aunty kent is getting stuck in his statement of defence 'finding sufficient particulars must be given to inform the plaintiff of the basis on which the opinion is based.'
Of course it is recorded that Stockdale, Taylor, Purkiss, Parker are all mates of the same bent. In fact by description Stockdale and Taylor have 'spoken' for Kent Parker and Vic Purkiss because it is a given that both the writer and publisher are responsible. What Stockdale says, swears ....'there was no blood inside the rifle...David Bain had scratches on his chest on the morning of the killings...Karam lied on the Laws show....David was not stripped searched...I got from the horse's mouth.' is in fact the mouth of Parker and Purkiss, because the two ps are the publishers and the words spoken between any of the partners are in fact the words of those that remain silent, or who are complicit in the defamation being disseminated.
But we can go further, a lot further. Joe Karam is entitled to state his case on the issue of the forensic evidence against Robin and argue that his reputation was damaged by the claims that there was no blood in the rifle and so on and that he was a 'myth maker, making myths,' the many claims that are inaccurate and which the hate-sites continue to proliferate. The two ps have no defence that ursurps the trial transcript or evidence, they have nothing to point to support their claims (or those so published of their site members) they can't show the published articles were 'reports of truth on a subject of public interest...fair and accurate reports of statements made in courts.. honestly held opinion or comment based on true facts..' because none of the facts exists, even variations of them, they could find favour as a defence, don't exist. Literally, on such matters there is no credible defence. Parker and the others went far beyond honestly held opinion into defamation based on untruths, whether they were careless or not, or mislead into believing the 'truth' as it has existed for them - is wholly their responsibility. There is no room for saying that Aunt Agatha told me and I believed her.
Others have spoken about the aggravating factors of the defamation of Joe Karam in that it has continued as we all see by Taylor, Cameron and others on Trade Me - if had been simply that Parker had believed the mythical 'Aunt Agatha' until the point he discovered the truth, he was bound to withdraw and apologise - but he has maintained his position and in the last few weeks we have seen his 'gallants' revealed as deliberate liars continuing a propaganda campaign. If the blood in the barrel is one of the recorded offences, we may yet hear Stockdale reading from a credited trial transcript the evidence of Peter Ross, or directly from the job sheet of Hentschel the evidence regarding the 'extensive' blood in the rifle, and when asked where it was that he (Stockdale) in fact got his 'truth' we may yet hear who the horse's mouth is. That horse's mouth, or mouths have a lot to answer for and someone is coming calling for those answers. Who will it be? I hope also to hear from some old favourites fattonybalonyobook, nina_concertina, goobergoof, arsew..e - just to name a few explaining the 'truth' of their ongoing defamation.
[39] Similarly, a Statement of Defence must plead explicitly any affirmative defence. When 'truth' is the basis of a defence, it is necessary to make it clear what is said to be true, so the plaintiff knows what case he or she has to meet. Where a defendant raises an imputation of misconduct against a plaintiff, the plaintiff ought to to be able to go to trial with knowledge of the acts which are alleged and which the defendant intends to rely to justify the imputation. Similarly, where defences of honest opinion and/or qualified privilege are raised, sufficient particulars must be given to inform the plaintiff of the basis on which the opinion is based, or the circumstances which give rise to a privileged occasion.
I would imagine this is where dear old aunty kent is getting stuck in his statement of defence 'finding sufficient particulars must be given to inform the plaintiff of the basis on which the opinion is based.'
Of course it is recorded that Stockdale, Taylor, Purkiss, Parker are all mates of the same bent. In fact by description Stockdale and Taylor have 'spoken' for Kent Parker and Vic Purkiss because it is a given that both the writer and publisher are responsible. What Stockdale says, swears ....'there was no blood inside the rifle...David Bain had scratches on his chest on the morning of the killings...Karam lied on the Laws show....David was not stripped searched...I got from the horse's mouth.' is in fact the mouth of Parker and Purkiss, because the two ps are the publishers and the words spoken between any of the partners are in fact the words of those that remain silent, or who are complicit in the defamation being disseminated.
But we can go further, a lot further. Joe Karam is entitled to state his case on the issue of the forensic evidence against Robin and argue that his reputation was damaged by the claims that there was no blood in the rifle and so on and that he was a 'myth maker, making myths,' the many claims that are inaccurate and which the hate-sites continue to proliferate. The two ps have no defence that ursurps the trial transcript or evidence, they have nothing to point to support their claims (or those so published of their site members) they can't show the published articles were 'reports of truth on a subject of public interest...fair and accurate reports of statements made in courts.. honestly held opinion or comment based on true facts..' because none of the facts exists, even variations of them, they could find favour as a defence, don't exist. Literally, on such matters there is no credible defence. Parker and the others went far beyond honestly held opinion into defamation based on untruths, whether they were careless or not, or mislead into believing the 'truth' as it has existed for them - is wholly their responsibility. There is no room for saying that Aunt Agatha told me and I believed her.
Others have spoken about the aggravating factors of the defamation of Joe Karam in that it has continued as we all see by Taylor, Cameron and others on Trade Me - if had been simply that Parker had believed the mythical 'Aunt Agatha' until the point he discovered the truth, he was bound to withdraw and apologise - but he has maintained his position and in the last few weeks we have seen his 'gallants' revealed as deliberate liars continuing a propaganda campaign. If the blood in the barrel is one of the recorded offences, we may yet hear Stockdale reading from a credited trial transcript the evidence of Peter Ross, or directly from the job sheet of Hentschel the evidence regarding the 'extensive' blood in the rifle, and when asked where it was that he (Stockdale) in fact got his 'truth' we may yet hear who the horse's mouth is. That horse's mouth, or mouths have a lot to answer for and someone is coming calling for those answers. Who will it be? I hope also to hear from some old favourites fattonybalonyobook, nina_concertina, goobergoof, arsew..e - just to name a few explaining the 'truth' of their ongoing defamation.
Oh look, Ralph Taylor head fiddler supporter having a tanty....
Well stop posting and go back to that blog and join the others there with their snouts in the swill.The tread here is about defending the good name and character of Robin Bain which the defence in the retrial went out of their way to trash and assisnate while his son watched silently and smugly on.Not brave enough to take the stand and face close scrutiny and gain incriminate himself as he did so expertly in the first trial.
Edited by jeeves-50 at 11:51 am, Sun 14 Nov
Quotejeeves-50 (3 ) 11:43 am, Sun 14 Nov #29899
You are not really the person to be talking about bravery Ralph Taylor, afterall you are one of the head pedo-supporters. You are also the one that denied that David was stripped searched, that Daddy's blood was in the barrel or that he had high-velocity spatter on his shoe. Now, you did hang your credibility on those main issues, in fact as it is now proven, lied about them along with the damage to daddy's hands and the 'scratches' your 'friend' Denise Cameron saw. You hung your hat out on the claim that Joe Karam was the liar, not you. Well, we know who the liars are now don't we Ralphie? There can only be one reason that you lie about the case Taylor and that is that you're intent on covering up for a dead pedo. Why do you do that Ralph? Do you belong to some organisation that supports paedophilia and protects offenders? That's what it looks like Ralph, because when the forensic truth has come out showing Robin's proven culpability you are silent on the question and instead attack David fully well knowing the forensic proof against daddy cannot be rebutted and the evidence of the 'extensive' blood inside the rifle was never challenged by the Crown. Well Ralph, I can't really put this nicely - but to me you display all the characteristics of a paedophile. Not only that, but you are recorded as taking part in organised cyber stalking. In your haste you made mistakes Ralph, you continue to make them - I guess being a pedo supporter uncovers part of your personality and predilections that you can't help but reveal. Get help, and go away.
Edited by jeeves-50 at 11:51 am, Sun 14 Nov
Quotejeeves-50 (3 ) 11:43 am, Sun 14 Nov #29899
You are not really the person to be talking about bravery Ralph Taylor, afterall you are one of the head pedo-supporters. You are also the one that denied that David was stripped searched, that Daddy's blood was in the barrel or that he had high-velocity spatter on his shoe. Now, you did hang your credibility on those main issues, in fact as it is now proven, lied about them along with the damage to daddy's hands and the 'scratches' your 'friend' Denise Cameron saw. You hung your hat out on the claim that Joe Karam was the liar, not you. Well, we know who the liars are now don't we Ralphie? There can only be one reason that you lie about the case Taylor and that is that you're intent on covering up for a dead pedo. Why do you do that Ralph? Do you belong to some organisation that supports paedophilia and protects offenders? That's what it looks like Ralph, because when the forensic truth has come out showing Robin's proven culpability you are silent on the question and instead attack David fully well knowing the forensic proof against daddy cannot be rebutted and the evidence of the 'extensive' blood inside the rifle was never challenged by the Crown. Well Ralph, I can't really put this nicely - but to me you display all the characteristics of a paedophile. Not only that, but you are recorded as taking part in organised cyber stalking. In your haste you made mistakes Ralph, you continue to make them - I guess being a pedo supporter uncovers part of your personality and predilections that you can't help but reveal. Get help, and go away.
Saturday, November 13, 2010
One of the difficulties in dealing with the hate-siters is they turn phrases into mantras. Mike Stockdale: lying again?
One of the first I recall was...'there was no blood on Robin,' another was that 'Robin had no injuries' of course the other and probably most idiotic and one of my favourites was that David Bain needed to be seen on the paper round to prove his 'alibi.' For 15 years some sections of NZ society believed that one, started by the Police and keenly swallowed by the vindictive gullible. Obviously, the papers being delivered was proof of their delivery and didn't rely on David having to be 'sighted.' Even Stockdale eventually got the point, but in true Stockdale myopic fashion of protecting dead daddy at all costs, Stockdale claimed that because David was an actor he needed to enhance the alibi with some theatrics. I think Stockdale even had David diving in and out of bushes at some stage and going along the pathway in the wrong direction, sleuths these days are not up to scratch.
On the issue of brainless Mike, he's taken a real hammering over the blood in the barrel, air borne spatter, the non existing scratches, the strip search, the drops of blood on Robin's right shoe et al. But in true moron fashion he's setting himself up (again) with a claim of the age of the injuries to Robin's hands. On the subject of the injuries to Robin's hands, that was a contributing factor on me being banned from Counterspin when I'd popped over for a chat and a cup of tea with the old dears wearing their blue wigs. As was another issue they didn't like - me saying that David was stripped searched, asking the question and why, and additionally why or why not, were intimate samples not taken from dead daddy? Some very expensive sets of false teeth flew through the air that day and we all had a jolly good time, and I should also mention that a couple of the goobers who had arrived without teeth left with some - so there is some benefit joining a hate-site if your broke and toothless because they regularly get spat out over there and people such as cowpat kal and nationalbroadcastingyoursecretsannie.curran will grab those teeth if they can get away it. They'll even read magazines in the supermarket and get upset at closing time and ask if they take it home and bring it back in the morning.
But back to Mike. Now Mike has got the trial transcript, or claims he has it, and also claims to have a hot line with Millie Weir and Henschel which leads him to contend that the injuries to Robin's hands were over 24 hours old. Originally, I'd gone from a report on stuff that the injuries may have been minutes to hours old. So I was banned. Nothing like winning argument, or proving a point, by banning your opponent particularly if you think (he's thinking) that you're a pedo supporter bsing about the age of the injuries to daddy's mitts. Now of course Mike has claimed that Joe Karam lied about a number of things on the Laws show, however he's been yet able to prove one, whilst many (claims by Stockdale as seen above) have been disproved.
So once again Stockdale, I'm telling you, that you are a liar. It's not Joe Karam lying, it's you and you repeatedly lie and you get caught out again and again.
Injury debate. The injury referred to on the Laws programme was on the back of Robin's right hand, interestingly just a wee bit between the knuckles and the wrist where Dr. Adams believed he could see evidence of tooth marks. It, the injury in question, is shown in a number of photos variously referred to as PMR38, 601/4 and 601/59 at the retrial. Retrial evidence in reference to this photo is as below.
Dr. Dempster
Evidence in Chief page 1603 line 12-15
"an abrasion 20 mm in diameter with a surrounding bruise 20mm in diameter"
Line 20
"I formed the opinion that it was a relatively recent bruise"
XXM page 1699, line 21-25
Q. But thats a fair way of putting it isnt it, even with hystology we probably cant tell whether its within a few minutes or up to 12 hours, we just dont know?
A. Thats correct
Crown witness patholgist Dr Thompson
XXM page 1796
Line 22.
Q. Have you seen photo 59 before?
A. No I havent
then referrred to the same injury he says at line 31- 33
Q. it seems to be quite recent doesnt it?
A. Yes its - its moist and hasnt got a scab on it
Q. Right, indicating?
A. A recent injury the last 6 to 12 hours.
So the oldest the injuries could be dated (by Thompson) was 6 to 12 hours. And the least (by Dempster) a few minutes. I will just remind readers again that both Dempster and Thompson were Crown witnesses called in the absence of Mike Stockdale who was attending an international Bullcrap Artist of the Year award as a guess speaker and previous multiple winner.
You bullshi...r Mike Stockdale, you pale Walter Mitty's reputation to transparency.
On the issue of brainless Mike, he's taken a real hammering over the blood in the barrel, air borne spatter, the non existing scratches, the strip search, the drops of blood on Robin's right shoe et al. But in true moron fashion he's setting himself up (again) with a claim of the age of the injuries to Robin's hands. On the subject of the injuries to Robin's hands, that was a contributing factor on me being banned from Counterspin when I'd popped over for a chat and a cup of tea with the old dears wearing their blue wigs. As was another issue they didn't like - me saying that David was stripped searched, asking the question and why, and additionally why or why not, were intimate samples not taken from dead daddy? Some very expensive sets of false teeth flew through the air that day and we all had a jolly good time, and I should also mention that a couple of the goobers who had arrived without teeth left with some - so there is some benefit joining a hate-site if your broke and toothless because they regularly get spat out over there and people such as cowpat kal and nationalbroadcastingyoursecretsannie.curran will grab those teeth if they can get away it. They'll even read magazines in the supermarket and get upset at closing time and ask if they take it home and bring it back in the morning.
But back to Mike. Now Mike has got the trial transcript, or claims he has it, and also claims to have a hot line with Millie Weir and Henschel which leads him to contend that the injuries to Robin's hands were over 24 hours old. Originally, I'd gone from a report on stuff that the injuries may have been minutes to hours old. So I was banned. Nothing like winning argument, or proving a point, by banning your opponent particularly if you think (he's thinking) that you're a pedo supporter bsing about the age of the injuries to daddy's mitts. Now of course Mike has claimed that Joe Karam lied about a number of things on the Laws show, however he's been yet able to prove one, whilst many (claims by Stockdale as seen above) have been disproved.
So once again Stockdale, I'm telling you, that you are a liar. It's not Joe Karam lying, it's you and you repeatedly lie and you get caught out again and again.
Injury debate. The injury referred to on the Laws programme was on the back of Robin's right hand, interestingly just a wee bit between the knuckles and the wrist where Dr. Adams believed he could see evidence of tooth marks. It, the injury in question, is shown in a number of photos variously referred to as PMR38, 601/4 and 601/59 at the retrial. Retrial evidence in reference to this photo is as below.
Dr. Dempster
Evidence in Chief page 1603 line 12-15
"an abrasion 20 mm in diameter with a surrounding bruise 20mm in diameter"
Line 20
"I formed the opinion that it was a relatively recent bruise"
XXM page 1699, line 21-25
Q. But thats a fair way of putting it isnt it, even with hystology we probably cant tell whether its within a few minutes or up to 12 hours, we just dont know?
A. Thats correct
Crown witness patholgist Dr Thompson
XXM page 1796
Line 22.
Q. Have you seen photo 59 before?
A. No I havent
then referrred to the same injury he says at line 31- 33
Q. it seems to be quite recent doesnt it?
A. Yes its - its moist and hasnt got a scab on it
Q. Right, indicating?
A. A recent injury the last 6 to 12 hours.
So the oldest the injuries could be dated (by Thompson) was 6 to 12 hours. And the least (by Dempster) a few minutes. I will just remind readers again that both Dempster and Thompson were Crown witnesses called in the absence of Mike Stockdale who was attending an international Bullcrap Artist of the Year award as a guess speaker and previous multiple winner.
You bullshi...r Mike Stockdale, you pale Walter Mitty's reputation to transparency.
Robin's blood and the blood on his shoe told investigators everything they needed to know. Pity they weren't listening.
First this to confirm the type of spatter found on Robin's shoe travelling in the wrong direction to have been from his own wound. The forensic evidence against Robin Bain is overwhelming.
Low Velocity - This type of spatter is usually caused by an impact to the blood source at a rate of 5 feet per second and is usually about 4 millimeters in diameter.
Medium Velocity - This type of spatter is usually caused by an impact to the blood source at a rate of 5-25 feet per second. Stains caused by this type of force are usually 1-3 millimeters in diameter, but may be larger or smaller.
High Velocity - This type of spatter is usually caused by an impact to the blood source in excess of 100 feet per second and is usually less than 1 millimeter in diameter, although it can be larger or smaller.
When blood hits a surface at an angle other than 90 degrees, the direction of it's path will be able to be viewed, interpreted and measured, which allows investigators to reconstruct what and how something occurred.
Although the picture to the left is is computer generated and not very realistic in appearance, it was made to look the way it is to exemplify how the direction of the path of blood can be indicated by "tail" of the stain. In this example, the blood traveled from the lower left to upper right. If an investigator was attempting to determine where the source of the blood was when the stain was made, an equation can be used, which will give an accurate location.
Now this to explain what spatter can reveal about a crime/suicide scene.
High-velocity spatters are usually caused by gunshot wounds, although they can be caused by other weapons if the assailant exerts an extreme amount of force. They travel more than 100 feet per second and usually look like a fine spray of tiny droplets, less than one millimeter in diameter. Bullet wounds are unique because they can have both back and front spatters, or just back spatters. This depends on whether the bullet stopped after entering the victim's body or traveled through it. In most cases, the back spatter is much smaller than the front spatter because the spatter travels in the direction of the bullet.
The Way of the Gun
If a gunshot occured at close range, the victim might have stippling, or burns on his skin from gunpowder. Shots fired at very close range can also cause internal muzzle staining. When this happens, the victim's blood is sucked back into the gun's muzzle by the cooling of the explosive gases that are released when a short is fired. Testing the gun's muzzle for blood can provide an additional clue to solve a case.
Analysts always look for voids, or empty places in the spatters that indicate that something (or someone) caught the spatter instead of the surrounding surfaces. In the case of a high-density spatter, this may mean that the assailant got some of the victim's blood on himself or herself. Sometimes, a blood spatter can look like it was high velocity when it was actually a medium- or low-velocity spatter. Cast-off droplets can fall from larger drops of blood. A savvy analyst looks for larger drops of blood among the many tiny drops to see if they are castoffs. These types of droplets are also found often on places like ceilings when the rest of the spatters are concentrated elsewhere.
Blood spatters can also overlap each other, which can show which gunshot or stab wound took place first.
Size and the force of impact are only two aspects of determining information about blood spatters. Next, we'll look at the shapes of spatters and how analysts use strings, trigonometric functions and computer programs to map out a blood-spattered crime scene.
I've abridged the above because it makes the necessary points about the size of spatter and how that is indicative of velocity. The spatter on Robin's shoes was high velocity by that description which was echoed by defence evidence. That evidence also attested to the direction of the spatter indicating that the spatter on Robin's shoe came from one of his victims because his wound was left temple while the spatter found on the shoe was going left to right, that's affirmative - left to right.
The second quote above repeats in some detail the first, or confirms the common knowledge of what spatter is. However, the second goes onto speak about shielding, ie areas shielded from blood spatter. We know there was no indicative shielded that allowed a gun man to be in the room with Robin, we also clearly know the hard contact necessary for the vacuum effect - there is more on that in the trial transcript with clearly defines the type of contact wound Robin had by not only the characteristics of the wound but also the vacuum effect of drawing spatter inside the rifle.
Interestingly, the second quote moves onto mention 'look at the shapes of spatters and how analysts use strings, trigonometric functions and computer programs to map out a blood-spattered crime scene.' This analysis opportunity was available to the Bain Police team, if not locally then certainly internationally, we all know now they didn't take that opportunity and that if they had David would have been exculpated as a suspect. This is the unnecessary haste that I've written about earlier, the Police should have exhausted the forensic evidence of the lounge at least, but they had already charged David before they had even the basic results. Unfortunately, they never turned back, no one resisted the haste of 'gut feelings' or 'suspicion' and looked quietly at the evidence to reconstruct Robin's obvious suicide, instead obvious things were given sinister meaning - the magazine on it's edge, the body close to the rifle, all guess work and no science, then all effort to cover the guess work with language such as 'paper run alibi' even to the point that the innocence of David Bain admitting the rifle was his and that no one else had access to it became 'proof' and things that he said that did not fit were 'lies.'
Right now, somebody in NZ or overseas could be using a computer programme to reconstruct Robin's death, that was the job of the NZ Police, but at some point the truth became something those particular Dunedin officers didn't want to know.
Low Velocity - This type of spatter is usually caused by an impact to the blood source at a rate of 5 feet per second and is usually about 4 millimeters in diameter.
Medium Velocity - This type of spatter is usually caused by an impact to the blood source at a rate of 5-25 feet per second. Stains caused by this type of force are usually 1-3 millimeters in diameter, but may be larger or smaller.
High Velocity - This type of spatter is usually caused by an impact to the blood source in excess of 100 feet per second and is usually less than 1 millimeter in diameter, although it can be larger or smaller.
When blood hits a surface at an angle other than 90 degrees, the direction of it's path will be able to be viewed, interpreted and measured, which allows investigators to reconstruct what and how something occurred.
Although the picture to the left is is computer generated and not very realistic in appearance, it was made to look the way it is to exemplify how the direction of the path of blood can be indicated by "tail" of the stain. In this example, the blood traveled from the lower left to upper right. If an investigator was attempting to determine where the source of the blood was when the stain was made, an equation can be used, which will give an accurate location.
Now this to explain what spatter can reveal about a crime/suicide scene.
High-velocity spatters are usually caused by gunshot wounds, although they can be caused by other weapons if the assailant exerts an extreme amount of force. They travel more than 100 feet per second and usually look like a fine spray of tiny droplets, less than one millimeter in diameter. Bullet wounds are unique because they can have both back and front spatters, or just back spatters. This depends on whether the bullet stopped after entering the victim's body or traveled through it. In most cases, the back spatter is much smaller than the front spatter because the spatter travels in the direction of the bullet.
The Way of the Gun
If a gunshot occured at close range, the victim might have stippling, or burns on his skin from gunpowder. Shots fired at very close range can also cause internal muzzle staining. When this happens, the victim's blood is sucked back into the gun's muzzle by the cooling of the explosive gases that are released when a short is fired. Testing the gun's muzzle for blood can provide an additional clue to solve a case.
Analysts always look for voids, or empty places in the spatters that indicate that something (or someone) caught the spatter instead of the surrounding surfaces. In the case of a high-density spatter, this may mean that the assailant got some of the victim's blood on himself or herself. Sometimes, a blood spatter can look like it was high velocity when it was actually a medium- or low-velocity spatter. Cast-off droplets can fall from larger drops of blood. A savvy analyst looks for larger drops of blood among the many tiny drops to see if they are castoffs. These types of droplets are also found often on places like ceilings when the rest of the spatters are concentrated elsewhere.
Blood spatters can also overlap each other, which can show which gunshot or stab wound took place first.
Size and the force of impact are only two aspects of determining information about blood spatters. Next, we'll look at the shapes of spatters and how analysts use strings, trigonometric functions and computer programs to map out a blood-spattered crime scene.
I've abridged the above because it makes the necessary points about the size of spatter and how that is indicative of velocity. The spatter on Robin's shoes was high velocity by that description which was echoed by defence evidence. That evidence also attested to the direction of the spatter indicating that the spatter on Robin's shoe came from one of his victims because his wound was left temple while the spatter found on the shoe was going left to right, that's affirmative - left to right.
The second quote above repeats in some detail the first, or confirms the common knowledge of what spatter is. However, the second goes onto speak about shielding, ie areas shielded from blood spatter. We know there was no indicative shielded that allowed a gun man to be in the room with Robin, we also clearly know the hard contact necessary for the vacuum effect - there is more on that in the trial transcript with clearly defines the type of contact wound Robin had by not only the characteristics of the wound but also the vacuum effect of drawing spatter inside the rifle.
Interestingly, the second quote moves onto mention 'look at the shapes of spatters and how analysts use strings, trigonometric functions and computer programs to map out a blood-spattered crime scene.' This analysis opportunity was available to the Bain Police team, if not locally then certainly internationally, we all know now they didn't take that opportunity and that if they had David would have been exculpated as a suspect. This is the unnecessary haste that I've written about earlier, the Police should have exhausted the forensic evidence of the lounge at least, but they had already charged David before they had even the basic results. Unfortunately, they never turned back, no one resisted the haste of 'gut feelings' or 'suspicion' and looked quietly at the evidence to reconstruct Robin's obvious suicide, instead obvious things were given sinister meaning - the magazine on it's edge, the body close to the rifle, all guess work and no science, then all effort to cover the guess work with language such as 'paper run alibi' even to the point that the innocence of David Bain admitting the rifle was his and that no one else had access to it became 'proof' and things that he said that did not fit were 'lies.'
Right now, somebody in NZ or overseas could be using a computer programme to reconstruct Robin's death, that was the job of the NZ Police, but at some point the truth became something those particular Dunedin officers didn't want to know.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)