Faced with this -

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/8028450/Bain-compo-fight-setback.

There have been a couple of negative reactions to the above news from correspondents this morning. On the bare face of things it seems that this may not have even been related to David or Joe Karam. That of course would not be the greatest surprise, foremost because of the fact that the defence at least of recently hadn't received a copy of the Binnie report.

It's hardly a secret that there were rumours that the Justice Department itself had problems with the report that I think fairly could have only been as the result of criticism of the department in the report. Criticism set down in the first instance by the Privy Council when they quashed the convictions of David Bain and left it up to the New Zealand authorities to decide on whether a retrial should take place. Whilst the Privy Council ordered a retrial they were clear in pointing out in the judgement that it was the decision of Crown Law whether to proceed with one or not. I've been told that the original application was in fact seeking a retrial, possibly that would be seen now as a mistake, although of course when the application was filed various things would have been in the mind of the defence, the least of which would have been a retrial. So goes the conservative inches rather than miles approach. I doubt any of the Lawyers involved would have anticipated the thorough and searching response from the Privy Council, not as a reflection on the Privy Council but because our own Court of Appeal had botched the case so badly.

However first of all though, the 'delay' in acting on the Binnie report is a surprise, just as we don't know the content of the report we also don't know the reasons for the stated re-evaluation of the report. No doubt Justice Binnie was unlikely to take any prisoners in analysing not only the reasons for determining his reported finding that David Bain was innocent on the balance of probabilities, but he would certainly have been justified in condemning The Crown for not only deciding on a retrial but also for 'happily' allowing 'recovered memory' evidence from some police officers. In particular the officer who had 'not wanted' to be criticised for handing David a pair of glasses on the morning on the killings and so claimed that as reason for keeping 'damning evidence against David Bain secret for over a decade. If that continued to show the propensity for police and Crown to withhold evidence it seemed lost on them in this later attempt when all evidence regarding the significance of the glasses had already been shredded  I guess they needed something to justify retrying David. This belated 'evidence' was another frantic effort to place the glasses of Margaret Bain back in the picture and the 'effort' to explain the planted lens would not have been lost of Ian Binnie that the Crown, 15 years after perpetrating a gross Miscarriage of Justice, were simply carrying on in the same fashion. Within the Justice Department and the police force there are many with reputations lost over the Bain case when the overall picture is collated. None of that is a direct influence on this application but the reputation of the Crown and police is. So until the public are told nobody apart from within the Justice Department and police are aware of how much effort, threats to sue and other issues have raised their heads.

I don't recall his name at the moment but there was an ex Deputy police commissioner who took over The Department of Corrections some years ago. When Judith Collins clashed with him she would not express confidence in his leadership of the department. This guy however did not back down a single inch and the Minister blinked mightily. The man involved was actually doing a sterling job by all reports but some were looking for his head to roll over the Burton case I think it was. Obviously Collins had no stomach for the fight and her 'target' had conducted his role in the department professionally and with distinction. I mention this to remind others that there will be some in the police and legal profession pushing hard for their own rights, perhaps not to be 'exposed' publicly with criticism they've been unable to answer. If any of this is the case it can immediately be seen why there are reasons for strong criticism on what is essentially a 'controlled' investigation into the false imprisonment of David Bain. Although Binnie's investigation is in fact impartial, the screening of the his finding is far from being so. First indication of that - David Bain doesn't have a copy of the report, while on the other hand drums are beating about the criticism in the report of police and The Crown. Judith Collins is essentially representing the Crown, the diagonal opposite of what refinements the Magna Carta brought into English Law. One could argue that any criticism of The Crown is criticism of her. Why on earth legislation for the protection of New Zealanders should ever have been enshrined in 'God's own Government's' interpretation of it's powers as 'King' remains as baffling as the silence on this report, or even the need for David Bain, or any others like him, to go cap in hand to the entity that falsely imprisoned them beggars belief.

As it is, we have on the face of it, Collins now searching for a Queens Counsel to address something already addressed by the Law Lords of the Privy Council,  successfully defended in the New Zealand Courts by not 1 but 2 Queen's counsels, and, if the reports are true, confirmed by an internationally acclaimed Jurist and retired Judge as innocent.  So where it the due process? Certainly not with the applicant being informed of the report, but rather left in disdain along with his lawyer a Queen's Counsel. If there is any reason for not having a Ministry looking into itself Judith Collins needed to look no further than her experience with the previous head of Corrections, she looked to pass judgement on him during a political storm, make him a scapegoat and it backfired. To this point David Bain has had no similar chance to address any 'issues' with his application because nobody has told him there are any. Now the Minister apparently talks about not reporting to Cabinet until the new year, very luxurious indulgence by her of David's.

The Prime Minister has spoken about the public interest in this case, and noted that it is important to be fair. That again could be assumed to be those with reputations at stake because David Bain has nothing to lose - everything possible as already been taken from him. I hope there is some loud banging on doors happening at the moment, but regardless of that David Bain will not go away until he has Justice. As other observers will know there are many legal opportunities for remedy before him, perhaps one as simple as duty of care, or reasonable expectation of being safely and lawfully treated by the Crown's agents that has allowed Susan Couch the opportunity to sue the Government because of danger she and others were put into by the Justice Department. Similar to the type of danger arising from police charging somebody before they have or understand evidence at hand, then lie and omit it at will.