Sunday, February 26, 2012

The Myth that nobody spoke for Robin Bain.

With the acquittal of David Bain intact despite a flood of misinformation and misunderstanding of the evidence of Robin's suicide, one of the  things that continues to drive the hate-siters is  the protestation 'that nobody speaks for Robin.'

On the surface one could be influenced by that. The very thought that a dead man was unable to defend himself, was a situation that appealed to the less-practical minded and those unsatisfied by anything other than conflict. However, nothing could be further from the truth. An entire police force spoke for Robin, Crown Law and associated offices spoke for Robin as well with their decision that it was either Robin or David that had killed the Bain family, Margaret, Arawa, Lanient and Stephen. It could be even argued that the Courts spoke for Robin, I don't mean by the Appeal Court Decision that was overturned, but by the conduct of trials and appeals that combined to facilitate the effort to prove it was David, not Robin.

The cost of speaking for Robin has been over $20 million at this point, and continues to rise. From the time the Privy Council quashed David's conviction there was a full time team of detectives working on the case numbering in the mid twenties, they did that for two years, there were all the forensic costs added to that, plus advice and specialist opinions - it appears there was no restraint on the costs of shoring up the already failed case against David. Even the decision to hold a retrial, at a cost of $10 million is distinctly questionable once the forensic evidence produced at the retrial is examined. It needs to be asked why the Crown continued on promoting Robin's innocence when his hands showed all the signs of his being involved in the killings and analysis of the blood spatter confirmed his suicide. I've spoken before about the Crown Pathologists Dempster only discovering before the retrial that his staff's photos of the blood smears on Robin's hands had not been used, instead replaced by others that did not show the blood. The letter Dempster wrote had a strong subtext that one could assume was an implied suggestion that the evidence of the blood smears, and the newer awareness for Dempster that body's could gurgle long after death made a trial unnecessary.
If Dempster had some misgivings, and taking into account that he conceded at the trial that suicide 'was quite feasible' it's plain that evidence or lack of evidence wasn't diverting the Crown from the speaking for Robin. It was a poor decision to proceed and something akin to the Civil law of discovery under Judicial advice perhaps might have helped, but it seems from the applications made to dismiss the proceedings the Courts were too influenced by 'public interest' that time has prove was in part generated by those associated with or sympathetic to the prosecuting process.

Taken to a conclusion, everything that could possibly done to speak for Robin as not committing familicide was done, some evidence which didn't speak for him was hidden. Speaking for Robin has cost the country over 20 million with more to add, it's cost David Bain is an almost  immeasurable amount that will be difficult to fairly assess. But no person, unless corrupted by hate, could ever not acknowledge that Robin was spoken for, and very loudly, so loud at times that Justice wasn't heard.


  1. You're right, plenty of evidence against Robin was withheld, and plenty of evidence for him was like the contents of a bad infomercial.
    Those pretending to defend Robin are interested only in defending themselves and their miscarriage of justice.
    If they really cared about Robin, they'd care for the living person who is 1/2 Robin.
    If Robin has grandchildren, 1/4 Robin, will Robin's grandchildren also be persecuted?
    Or would his grandchildren be a type of 'tribute' to Robin?

  2. Who knows what illogical position the sisters would arrive at, you would probably need to think of the stupidest thing imaginable to get even pretty close.

    One thing remains however, they scared to read 'Trial by Ambush,' afraid to see their myths pounded by logic and facts.

  3. The sisters certainly wouldn't care about Robin's grandchildren, just as they don't care about his son, and just as they never cared about Robin.

  4. Speaking for Robin Bain - well, Joe Karam goes a long way in speaking for Robin Bain in his new book. He skims over the incest very lightly, and concentrates on the decline into desperation that men like Robin experience before they commit familicide.
    Yet the counterspinners continue to demonise him themselves, by making out that the committing of familicide is a monstrous act done by a monster. Therefore Robin must have been a monster if he did it.
    It's abundantly clear he did do it, but Joe makes it abundantly clear that he was not a monster. Such charity is worthy of emulation. David loved his father,and has said so. David knows he was not a monster. So David and Joe Karam have both 'spoken for' Robin Bain.
    It is those Counterspinners that 'besmirch' him and continue to keep that 'besmirching' alive. They should have a little charity.

    1. It's disappointing that the counterspinners repeat the lie that David hated his family. David was a quite devoted son, said to have been part of a family he clearly loved and cared for. There was evidence that David was Robin's favourite, but the counterspinners want none of that, none of the truth because that on its own explains the Robin's suicide note as much as a note from a tragic and collapsed figure could ever make sense.

  5. I find it incredible that this group, who claims to be supporting Robin Bain insist on dragging his name further and deeper through the mud. It became obvious a very long time ago that Robin had huge personal problems. When David was found not guilty, the police didn't bother investigating the case further. Robin Bain and his family would have slipped from the public radar if they hadn't bothered with their campaign of hatrad against Karam.

    Because of their efforts, Robin Bain has remained under the spotlight. But this time, again due to their efforts, a deeper analysis of him and his dysfunction is called for. This time, when the compensation report is given, I have no dbout it will show all the evidence, which the JFRB group seems to have forgotten includes some very damning stuff about Robin.

    Their cries to have the suppressed evidence heard, seems odd. Considering the evidence against David inolves a fantasy of a young teenage boy. Compared to the evidence of father sexually interfering with his daughter, from at least four people, a teenage fantasy pales and means nothing, compared to that evidence.

    None of these conversations, or indeed probably this blog or others would exist, if it wasn't for them. When David Bain was found not guilty, Robin Bain would have been left to rest in peace.

  6. Another tragic aspect of this. We hear much made of the suppressed discredited evidence against David. Perhaps the hate-siters should pay moment to the suppressed evidence against Robin that has never been released.