Monday, May 7, 2012

A 1st for New Zealand - what do you do?

We have a rare example of a situation unprecedented in New Zealand - the exoneration of a man besieged by hate-sites for literally years. Some one who even had his supporters targeted as though the supporters had a personal relationship with David when in fact they were, are, mostly those characterised by a distinct New Zealand quality: fairness.

A recent report ranked New Zealand high in the fairness stakes, we fare not so well with the poverty gap, crimes against children but high in trust of one another. Trust and fairness are examples of the same thing. Nzers put fairness first, trusting that others do the same. That compares with Americans who place freedom first. Interestingly, the difference of what price freedom permits if it isn't accompanied by fairness could have been a qualifier to any answer in the polls, because freedom alone could stand highly in American minds beyond an element of fairness. So, perhaps Nzers view fairness as freedom as well, and consider that without fairness freedom can't exist from the average point of view.

It's that point of view that has been threatened by the hate-sites and some sections of the media who convinced themselves that David Bain was guilty and were unable to comprehend that a jury found him innocent. Before advancing on that guilt or innocence question, and where fairness fits into it, there have been a whole range of beliefs about the Bain case, some which couldn't stand scrutiny in the fair public mind but most which were dismantled, destroyed in the retrial. The only place false information about the Bain case can now be found is on the hate-sites so it must be assumed that drive behind the hate-sites was never toward fairness. That's an easy decision courtesy of Kent Parker's site which remains holding onto destroyed evidence as if it were true and only he is able to see that. I can report that the sum total of the objections currently on the hate sites is because a reporter referred to the Bain case as infamous, something which Parker considers to show a sinister meaning, along with that is the exhaustive attempts to deny that David Bain was stripped searched and no injuries to his chest were recorded that showed he had been in 'massive fight' with his brother Stephen. On the one hand the common use of the word 'infamous' and on the other the complete denial of an actual medical report that took David away from the murder scene at the time of the deaths.

So where does this fairness thing kick in? Judging that most Nzers are fairly moderate, and relatively restrained even on the internet, one could say that droves that have left the circle of Parker, shows that fairness kicks in when evidence is refuted, a fair trial heard and a jury makes a decision. Some of those that left may have later read the book 'Trial by Trickery' and felt not less than embarrassed by the attack which they took part in against Karam and Bain. It's hard to hold offence when a forensic specialist finally says no, 'the fingerprints were not in blood' when for years a person might have been considering that evidence as guilt, or the 'full' bladder that is shown now to have never been full. So it would be embarrassing for those folks that got hooked in firstly by the Crown then by Parker, Curran and others to discover they were manipulated by evil folk, intent on hiding the dark side of the Bain familicide, and what was sought to be hidden even below that. But those people go on about their lives now, wiser for the experience hopefully, fully cautious about being duped to the point of accusing and harassing others because you are 'right' and because you 'know' the evidence because it's on this really cool website where lies can be swallowed hook, line and sinker.

In this first instance of trials within trials, part of which is carried out on the internet (a situation I hope never happens again and which some advice is given from Justice Binnie perhaps to the Law Commission or Government) the malcontent's are beaten back, and the previously easily influenced, are strengthened in their detachment from the experience. What we are left with is that it isn't 'fair' to be driven into a frenzy by something we might desperately wish to believe in because it shows we are 'right thinking Nzers' and those that don't believe are not 'right thinking' and are therefore acceptable to attack along with their families and associates.

We are also left with the oddity that is Kent Parker and the disquiet that he and others sought to hide something in the life of Robin Bain. Even though there remains the possibility there was nothing to hide one must look at why Parker and the others chose to lie, and continue to lie even when evidence had overwhelmed their position. This is not a public matter for them but a personal matter, a matter which allowed them to lie and threaten others because of a common cause. If they had simply been mistaken they would have perhaps shrugged their shoulders, apologised even, said 'I got it wrong,' because those reactions are 'fair' and it would have set them among the majority that see fairness as foremost. Some simply walked away, probably a little embarrassed - having decided they'd got suckered but accepting they hadn't gone too far over the line in public or private forums, but others didn't, haven't - that's why it's obvious they're not driven by being fair, or even being honest, that's why they have been unable to appreciate the damage  they caused and moderated their position, or simply walked away. It's the hate, and the thing they hide being why they could never be fair.


No comments:

Post a Comment