The Bain case: another seed of deceit.

In so much as the Bain saga was played out in the media from the very beginning, very much a conditioning of the public mood to ensure that David was convicted and stayed convicted.

Think of some of the clichés that have proven to be false:
David's fingerprints on the gun in blood.
The use of the paper run as an 'alibi.'
The scratches David got from the massive fight with Stephen.
All the sinister connotations of his deja vu experiences that we now know to be common among young men.
That 'who ever heard the gurgling of Laniet was the killer.'

And the list goes laboriously on, one false fact after another, one insinuation presented with support from another.

Then think of what we didn't hear:

Robin had blood smears on his hands.
Robin's blood was found inside the rifle.
Robin's hands were bruised and bloody.
David was not home when the computer was turned on.
That Robin had been a firearm user all his life.
That Robin's footprints were found in the murder scene.
That the glasses said to be David's were in fact an old pair of his mothers.

Another list which goes on at length until we invariably reach the 'reliable' mantra Robin was the suspect, then later suspicion fell upon David. What a thoroughly convenient message from the investigators. Something which allowed the public to think that police thoroughly investigated the possibility that Robin was killer, were able to disprove that and turned their attention to the 'right' person, David. The very thought of this was a comfort I imagine for some, that the right person was arrested and charged despite  the unprecedented circumstances of a crime of this nature of which the son was the killer.

But this 'story' of the 'thorough' investigation into Robin is pure fiction, a deliberate lie. Over the years people have realised that the allegations of incest, and therefore a motive, against Robin were never investigated. Put by ex DS Doyle as they (the investigators) had no time for that because they 'had a murder to solve.' The same man would later agree that the thorough investigation did not include samples of the blood taken from Robin's hands even being tested despite the 'extensive' scrutiny of him as the main suspect.

Often in the Bain case the real truth was hidden by a lie, one of those was the 'strip search' which allegedly uncovered scratches on David's chest. This assertion was later covered over by another lie in the public  forum, that no strip search happened because David 'wasn't' a suspect. Well, now we know a strip search was conducted, the results recorded on a serialised form and handed to ex DS Doyle showing that David had no scratches on his chest the morning of the killings - but the 'scratches' were long celebrated right up until now by some of the seriously bewildered.

I always wanted to know if the 'main' first suspect's body was also searched for bruises and if, as one would presume, intimate tests made on his body to determine if he'd recently had sex for example. He was after all the 'main' suspect, the one  found on the ground with a rifle nearby that suggested suicide but no, now I discover no such tests were conducted on the body of Robin Bain - proving to be one of the biggest lies of all that he, Robin, was ever considered a suspect and his body treated in such a way to search for the forensic evidence that would have helped solve the crime.

How could a police investigation so poorly staged, one that overlooked all normal investigation procedures result in a Miscarriage of Justice if not every facet of it, as we now see, wasn't corrupted by an effort from somewhere near the outset to frame David Bain? Might this explain why the police pathologist Dr Dempster was kept waiting outside the scene for many hours, and might this also explain the continued disappearance of  Laniet's electronic diary that was said to contain the names of some of her clients. What could have held up a serious police investigation for hours, where one of the senior forensic experts critical to the investigation was kept away, where normal and known procedures weren't followed, unless it was an order from senior police who it can also be assumed steered the investigation away from the 'main' suspect.?

Going further along this line. If, and once, the diary was recovered weren't those that might have been named in there safe? Presumably yes. So what could have been the motivation to 'protect' the memory of Robin and falsely imprison his son? Why do others that know these answers not reveal them, why have they gone to such lengths to pervert the course of Justice.