David Bain: What cries van beynan and the media now?

Significantly this week not only has the media been relatively quiet on the news that David Bain's compensation claim is to go to cabinet along with a recommendation from Justice Binnie rather than being dismissed out of hand as the rules require for rejected applications, but also have the hate-siters.

Without doubt van beynan has been the foremost media contributor to the misinformation spread about the Bain case for many years. He has been lauded as somewhat of an expert on the case, but he is far from that. His expert capacity has hung on sweeping condemnation of David Bain and his guilt using such terms as David was found 'covered in blood' and others such as that David 'hated' his father. When David wasn't in the firing line it was Joe Karam, one can only suspect that was for reason of bias against David that became indistinguishable to van beynan despite him priding himself on being a 'journalist' and an 'expert' on the Bain case. Clearly vb has been unable to divorce his personal feelings to allow journalistic distance.

The record shows that vb was similarly 'affected' by another Miscarriage of Justice, the Peter Ellis case, where he eventually apologised for what could be fairly described as a bias against Ellis in an inappropriate 'child sex' case that in fact only existed in the minds of investigators. It might be too simplistic to say that the fact vb has or had a brother in a prominent position in the police was the cause for his journalistic short-sightedness but it still is difficult to dismiss the notion. I complained in recent years about an 'opinion' piece that vb won an 'award' for, among the many things I took exception to his 'opinion' piece is that he never dealt with any of the forensic evidence against Robin Bain and used 'shock' words similar to the 'covered in blood' mantra, persuasive but untrue. Most particularly I couldn't agree that balanced writing on the Bain case could totally ignore that Robin's blood and dna was found inside the suicide weapon and could have only arrived there from a contact or close contact shot - a scientific fact that can't be denied.

Of course another pillar of the bias led against David was the claim that he had scratches consistent with being in a fight the morning of the killings. In fact, as vb, well knew - the scratches did not exist that morning when David was subjected to invasive tests and examination by the police doctor. There can be no doubt that vb realised the significance of that omission in his writing and of the damage in the public mind his omission, as an 'expert' caused. Taking such omissions and similarly damaging untrue allegations into context there can be little doubt that any 'expert' would know the damage they were causing under their banner as an 'investigative journalist' and an 'award' wining one at that. The self-governing body of journalists and the print media have a lot to answer for in the persecution of David Cullen Bain.

But let's move on from the omissions and fabrications and we see vb warned by the police to stay away from jurors after he had been reported as harassing one jury member in a manner that demanded that the juror be answerable to vb. Credible and reliable journalism - I don't think so. Campaign of persecution instead? Even at the recent International Justice Conference, at question and answer time, vb gets his little jollies off by asking David if he hated his father, or if he had said that he did. Of course that question arises from other evidence misreported by vb when David said to the police that he would hate is father if it was true that he'd killed the family. Big difference, and big damage, consistent themes in the unbiased, award winning journalism of vb and the press council that support journalism that has no basis in truth.

vb has now become the easy target he sought to make David, because the truth has caught him out. David's truth when he said not guilty 5 times. Other such 'expert's are less visible on the horizon at this point but the dithering Professor of Law Bill Hodge, who apparently has no concerns for the truth but rather his position as a public commentator, came out with an vb style beauty this week apparently to cover up the egg he has over his face already for his comments on the Bain case. He introduced some last minute 'new evidence' that Robin was  asleep on his chair when he got shot. One must wonder how a Professor of Law could so blatantly 'invent' evidence that has never been offered in a court room without knowing that it was of the same nature as the 'one liner's bull dust that have been chortled by vb and others for over a decade and a half. Is Bill Hodge just an idiot that sees the chance to speak to microphone as the opportunity to ad lib on the truth, or is he someone found out, and when going down with his lies, chortles out another 'humdinger.'

One may have thought that 'burbling' or 'bulldust' Bill would have at least used the long since discredited 'Robin was shot while he was praying' giving rise to sympathy and indignation for the disaffected, but 'sleeping?' Showing old 'bulldust' is likely to come out with anything when he is on a roll. Maybe he simply has 'mental' difficulties and wasn't trying to contribute to the long list of untruths uttered about David. Perhaps he doesn't really comprehend that as spokesperson on the Law he is duty bound to his profession to tell the truth, with no false inventions just because he gets to watch himself and TV and can giggle and wonder who might believe his latest diversion from the truth.

I've finished this on a slightly less than serious note, because I feel it is better to treat with disdain those that purport to be truthful, balanced, informed but however go about lying without thought for whom they hurt and whom they mislead. They're a kind of sick type of individual, the type that would hold silent when someone is executed for a crime that the observer knows they didn't commit. Those that would be at your side when the sailing was fine and yet be disappeared when a storm arrived. People in fact that can't be trusted, nor be trusted for what they say or write. Which leads me to conclude on this point but however note that I anticipate to write again about the impact of the lies of vb and others, not just on David Bain, but on those that believed those lies and became something they wouldn't normally be - persecutors.