Linzo binzo the accused pedo is moaning again....

bit like the Police Officer Andrews evidence of the fall of DB which seemingly even though he saw the fall was completely wrong and some one not even in Dunedin on the morning was able to describe PC Andrews actions and observations better than he could himself. That PC Andrews is on and on the same old tired lies..
And same as the blood covered hands and the non human blood that tested positive for human enzymes then disappeared altogether, then came back.

Quotelinz4me (281 ) 3:54 pm, Mon 6 Dec #30978

The evidence is the evidence Kennard you idiot, just because it has become public knowledge that you and your hate-sites fellows have been lying about it for years is your misfortune you rotten pedo-supporting liar, couldn't happen to a more deserving person than you, you filthy supporter of perjury and persecution of the innocent.


Q. I'm just going to put something on the Jedi system beside you, it’s the photograph B2, of David’s bedroom. I just want to confirm that the position in which you saw David Bain when you first came in was seated as you’ve said with his right shoulder against the blue object there?
A. Yes.
Q. He's on the floor, seated on the floor, huddled up, correct?
A. Yeah.
Q. And he's facing what we can't see in this photograph, but he's facing the wardrobe which is out to the left?
A. Yes, just over here somewhere.
Q. Just over to the left?
A. Yes.
Q. You then stayed with him while the others went through the house, correct?
A. Yeah, at that doorway.
Q. And you’ve described various things that you heard going on that day but most importantly you heard two of the officers downstairs yell out that they had found the fifth body?
A. That’s correct.
Q. And quite properly you're not sure which officer it was, but that’s what you heard standing at the doorway of David’s room, correct?
A. Yes.
Q. When you heard that quite obviously so did David didn’t he?
A. I presume so yes.
Q. Because it was at that point that he started to shake wasn’t he?
A. Yes.
Q. And he attempted to get up didn’t he?
A. Oh –
Q. To stand up?
A. No, he just fell back, he just shook and fell back. I don’t know what he was trying to do but that’s what happened, he shook and fell back.
Q. So he, he started to shake?
A. Yep.
Q. He fell back between the bed and the wall?
A. Yeah, that blue object and yeah.
Q. But fell further back than that didn’t he?
A. He did. He did.
Q. You're aware that he's six foot four?
A. Yeah, about the same height as me.
Q. Tall person?
A. Mhm.
Q. Falling back he was falling right back between the bed and the wall wasn’t he?
A. Yes he was.
Q. He’d passed out hadn't he?
A. Um, I couldn’t say he passed out because his eyes were still open, up to the time I went in and pulled him out.
Q. He was unconscious wasn’t he?
A. No, oh I can't say, I can't say he was unconscious because I suppose if your eyes – all I can say is his eyes were open when I went in and pulled him out. In the recovery position his eyes were closed.
Q. Just before we get to that, so he's shaking, he crashes between the bed and the wall and he falls to the floor doesn’t he?
A. He falls backwards.
Q. To the floor?
A. Yes.
Q. You're standing at the door, right? You're still standing at the door at this stage?
A. That’s correct.
Q. So you rush in, and just seeing these objects on the screen as we do, all you could see at that stage were his legs?
A. Legs and bottom area, I put it.
Q. Because in order to get him out of there you had to drag him, and I think your notes reveal that you dragged him by one leg and one arm, is that correct?
A. Yes both. Left leg and left arm I recall.
Q. You dragged him left leg, left arm, and you pulled him from this wedge between the bed and the wall didn’t you?
A. Yep, yes I did.
Q. And you dragged him right out around this object that we see here, this drawer with these corners on them?
A. Yeah. Yes. I dragged him like that, not like that, like that. Arm and leg and pulled him out.
1430

Q. So as you are dragging him by the left arm and the left leg, he’s on his right-hand side isn’t he?
A. Yep, yes.
Q. And you pull him right around and then you turn him around and put him into the recovery position, correct?
A. That’s correct, yep.
Q. So that his face is now facing the bed, correct?
A. Yes, correct.
Q. And he’s still on his right-hand side, isn’t he?
A. Yes.
Q. And just so that I’m clear, as we look at this photo B2, he’s now right over – his head is right over where this pillow appears to be at the end of the bed?
A. Yes, the other –
Q. Bottom right-hand corner of the photograph?
A. Ah this one, yeah, lying this way. Lying…
Q. Sorry?
A. Lying that way, this – or is it this way, yes.
Q. So the head is roughly where that pillow is on the floor at that end of the bed, the right-hand end of the bed?
A. Yes.
Q. Now you checked his pulse and that’s when you called the ambulance officers, wasn’t it?
A. That’s correct.
Q. And after this dragging him out and letting him lie there, he was limp wasn’t he?
A. Yes he was.
Q. Now you were asked by Mr Mander about your other experience –
A. Yes.
Q. – of seeing people and your experience of seeing people in states where they have had fits, can I put it that way?
A. Yeah that’s fine, yep, yep.
Q. Your experience relates to a school friend who had a serious head injury, didn’t it?
A. Yes.
Q. And you’ll accept that you haven’t had any medical qualifications of a neurological or psychological nature?
A. Yeah I accept that.
Q. Or any psychiatric training at all?
A. No, no.
Q. And would you accept from me that when the brain is injured or has an underlying problem such as cerebral bleeds, results of serious injury, epileptic fits are often a symptom of that brain injury aren’t they?
A. Oh I’d accept that from you, yes.
Q. Would you accept that?
A. Yep.
Q. And that there are many types of epileptic fits or seizures, would you accept that?
A. I wouldn’t know but yeah if you’re saying that, I’d accept that.
Q. But the important point is here that I mean you’re not qualified to say one way or the other?
A. Exactly, yep.
Q. So the most you can say about what you saw that David was experiencing is only restricted to your experience of your friend at school with an epileptic seizure and those people you saw at Twizel with serious head injuries, correct?
A. Yeah that’s – that’s correct, yes.
Q. As a result of what happened that day, you had trauma counselling didn’t you shortly thereafter?
A. Yes we did.
Q. And did you have counselling during the rest of the week? Any further counselling?
A. No, no.
Q. Now I put to you that in the scene we’ve just described that David Bain lapsed into unconsciousness. You kept a notebook that day, didn’t you?
A. Yes.
Q. And if you don’t remember please tell me because I’m inviting you to look at it.
A. Yep.
Q. But isn’t it correct that you put in your notebook that David has gone into shock?
A. Um, I’d have to look at that, I don’t – oh I’ve got a copy here.
Q. Would you, it looks like “gone” and there is “in” very indistinct “to shock”?
A. Is it on the first page – on the first page.
Q. On the first page, yes? Just before, “Ambulance person arrived”?
A. Yep, yeah that’s correct.
Q. So that’s David gone into shock, is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. And then if you just look further down, this is what you did on the day correct?
A. Yes.
Q. You see, “David has come around”?
A. Yes, when he spoke to the, um, ambulance people. Or just gave his name.
Q. But what this records is, you thought at the time he’d gone into shock and he’s come around, didn’t you?
A. Yeah.
Q. And that’s consistent with someone losing consciousness, isn’t it?
A. Ah yes, yep.
re-examination: mr mander

Q. Now it was put to you that David was wedged between the wall and the bed. Was he wedged?
A. No he come out quite easily, I didn’t have to, um – I didn’t have to yank on him and pull him out, yeah I just lifted him slightly and pulled him out.
Q. And when you did that, did you observe any part of his body bang against anything?
A. No.
Q. Would you have noticed if there had been such contact?
A. Oh, to be honest no, I couldn’t – yeah, it was pretty fast so yeah, I – I don’t recall any contact with anything.

MS CULL:
I’ll just note that I had already established that he couldn’t see from there.
re-examination continues: mr mander
Q. And you were also asked about when he was falling backwards and I think you said his eyes were still open, is that right?
A. Yes when I went in to grab him, his eyes were still open.
Q. Can you just describe to us what you saw in terms of his eyes?
A. They were just, um, looking straight at me as I reached and grabbed him. And once I’d turned him around I lost sight of his eyes and put him down.

So Kennard you rotten fiddler that is the witnesses evidence, he couldn't see as much as which it to be lead that he could. From above...'MS CULL:
I’ll just note that I had already established that he couldn’t see from there.'

Also from above.....'Q. But isn’t it correct that you put in your notebook that David has gone into shock?
A. Um, I’d have to look at that, I don’t – oh I’ve got a copy here.
Q. Would you, it looks like “gone” and there is “in” very indistinct “to shock”?'....

So the witness's own notes, made at the time contradicted what he tried to say to 'help' the floundering police case. And despite his willingness to contradict his own notes, not he, or any other single witness claimed to have seen the injuries to David's head before the fall. Go open another bottle of plonk, the mackerel stuck up your bottom is getting thirsty. You look like an idiot up that tree with Ralph Taylor having a fish tail hanging out the back of your shortie pyjamas - have you no decency at all? Come down now!

William Rodie and Rachael Membery have defamed Joe Karam

many times, the most recently about David falling and banging his head beside the bed. They chorused this at length as though it might put in order all the forensic proof against Robin. They freely defame Karam not withstanding that they don't have the trial transcript, that rely on paper reports and information from discredited hate-sites. I imagine they see Joe Karam as a sitting target, an easy target using phrases such as the 'mountain of evidence against David,' or that dim-witted people are easily taken in by Karam. But hang on, wouldn't you have to be sure of your grounds, wouldn't you need to read the evidence carefully, not just some 'cleverly edited' piece fed from a hate site, because it is important before sticking your neck out to be sure of what you're saying, particularly if it is about a person who has shown all the tenacity in the world and prevailed against the odds. Time to look at what dopey sophy and retard said....

Speaking of untruths check this out.

Joe Karams version of what constable Andrews said at court, from radio live.
Karam [Quote] David Bain did faint, when he fainted he crashed down between, and banged his head, the officer Andrews who was with David when David fainted and crashed down behind the bed saw David crash down behind the bed and it was the constable Andrews who gave this evidence about him crashing down and banging his head on the wall by the window sill in his bedroom on the right side of his face, now that’s the evidence in the trial. [End Quote]

And here we have what the officer Andrews actually said in court in 2009, from page 336 of the transcripts.

Constable Andrews answers questions.

Q. And then the accused falling back?
A. Backwards, yeah.
Q. Backwards. Did you observe him hit his head or strike any part of his body?
A. NO I DIDN'T.

And below how this evidence was accurately reported in newspapers.

From: http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/2257185/Crown-alleges-
David-Bain-faked-a-fit
Leslie Andrew, a police constable who was one of the first three officers to enter the house after the 111 call from Bain, said he stayed with Bain as the two other officers checked the house.
He watched Bain from the doorway of his bedroom and when a dog barked from down the hall, Bain called: "Here Casey, Casey, Casey." When the other officers shouted that they had found five bodies, he saw Bain shaking for about 10 seconds and then falling backwards.
He noticed Bain's eyes were normal before he fell back, which he thought was "a bit strange".
"If he was having a fit his eyes would react as well," Andrew said.
He had seen people have fits before and had noticed their eyes would flicker and the whites of the eyes become prominent.
Andrew said he had pulled Bain out from the tight spot where he had fallen and placed him in a recovery position.
Bain, who looked straight at him as he pulled him out, did not hit his head or any part of his body and was limp.

From: http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/2254954/Crown-question
s-Bain-fit
Earlier, the police officer who saw David Bain have the fit that morning, Constable Leslie Andrew, said the episode seemed "strange''.

Andrew said Bain was sitting on his bedroom floor and then began shaking for 10 to 12 seconds before he fell backwards in a fit the Crown says was fake.

Andrew had observed other people have fits and their eyes normally changed and the whites became prominent before an attack.

Bain's eyes did not change before the fit and his episode seemed "strange'', he said.

Bain did not strike his head in the fit and when he went to assist David his eyes were open and he was "looking straight at me'', he said.

Andrew dragged a limp Bain into the recovery position and an ambulance officer was called.
-------------------------------
-------------------------------
-------------------
As you can see Joe Karams version of what was said, completely contradicts what Constable Leslie Andrew actually said when questioned at the Bain trial in 2009 and as reported by both Martin Van Beynen and Ian Steward for Christchurch's daily newspaper.

Quotesophier8 (1 ) 5:04 pm, Wed 24 Nov #30833

To repeat Dopey sophy's apparent trump card...
Q. And then the accused falling back?
A. Backwards, yeah.
Q. Backwards. Did you observe him hit his head or strike any part of his body?
A. NO I DIDN'T.

If you were an idiot and a desperate hate-siter like William Rodie and Rachael Membery you might think the above was some sort of paydirt. But to do so you need to omit the obvious that David did hit his head and strike part of his body and can only take Andrew's evidence when asked if he saw (that) as (like he said) A. No I didn't.' Which is far different than saying 'I saw him fall and he didn't strike any part of his body or head.' So if Mr Karam in his efforts to protect his good name decided to sue dopey sophy (Kirkdmaiden) William Rodie or goldnkiwi Rachael Dickyberryass Rachael Membery they'd be up the creek. But not as far as they imagine, because their lawyer, if they could afford one, would read the evidence and search for the complete answer to any defamation charges, but he or she wouldn't find it from carefully reading the evidence. What he or she would find is that no witness, not one, gave any evidence of seeing any bruises on David, before he fell. Oh dear how sad, tie up your ass and sad goodbye to your bees. And then look above again at the title William Rodie chose and which Retard Rachael Membery repeated 'Speaking of untruths check this out.' Well, you should have checked it out before you opened your big mouths Rachy and Little Willie, and you should have thought long and hard before defaming Joe Karam on a public message board that has already given rise to several hundred defamation charges, and you shouldn't have listened to idiots like OBrien and Curran because look where it has got you trusting 'your secrets are safe with me Curran and OBrien.' Oh goody, goody.