seems to have a rottweiler attached to her rather large rump. She's been telling nellies (oh what a nellie_nina she is) and a friendly old rotty has clamped her bum right between the two resident crocodiles that have been clamped on since her last trip up the Murray River.
nina_s wrote:
...
Young stated he went to the doors at the back and Robin came out of them...
nina_s wrote:
You're so brave asking TM posters to sustantiate claims made by the police aren't you?
I am asking you to substantiate your claim that Daryl Young stated Robin came out of the back doors of the van - because it was you that made it.
You now seem to be implying that the police made the same claim. Can you point to any evidence of the police claiming Young stated Robin came out of the back doors either ?
Edited by gwimweeper at 12:51 pm, Wed 1 Jun
Quote
gwimweeper (7 ) 12:44 pm, Wed 1 Jun #43
The qwimreeper is unwilling to let nina_concertina bum tell any more nellies, probably because he's reached his wit's end because she has been getting away with it for years. But hold on, right now she's scouring the earth to prove she isn't a liar, don't expect her back this century and wave the crocodiles goodbye. Bye bye old crocs, it's been good to know ya - don't forget to plaque your teeth.
Showing posts with label nina_s. Show all posts
Showing posts with label nina_s. Show all posts
Wednesday, June 1, 2011
Monday, May 30, 2011
Oh my goodness, Nina and osook on the point of some type of climax...
'Untruthful evidence' in Bain case - police
Another twist has emerged in one of New Zealand's most well-known murder cases.
ONE News can tonight reveal that police believe a defence witness in the David Bain retrial gave "untruthful evidence".
But police will not be taking action against photocopier salesman Daryl Young who gave evidence in the 2009 trial.
Bain was found not guilty of murdering his father, mother, two sisters and brother in a case that has captivated the country for more than 15 years and which has been the subject of huge controversy.
Now more controversy has been added with a letter released to ONE News about Young's evidence.
Young was a late witness in Bain's defence and told of his dealings with David's father, Robin Bain.
In court Young said: "I smelled alcohol and that's why I thought he wasn't at school".
Last year, documentary maker Bryan Bruce challenged the testimony, going as far as to ask police to investigate Young's entire evidence.
The reply came in a letter 10 months later when Detective Senior Sergeant David Harvey said: "I have concluded that untruthful evidence was given by Young. The investigation was referred for legal advice as to whether there was sufficient evidence to support a prosecution for perjury. It was determined that no criminal charges would follow."
However, Young's lawyers have told ONE News that the letter "contains a completely gratuitous and totally unfounded allegation relating to Mr Young".
They say "not only is the allegation completely unfounded, but it's contrary to the Crown's own evidence."
David Bain's defence also rejects the police findings, calling them unadulterated rubbish.
But both Bryan Bruce and Robin Bain's brother are questioning why no perjury charges are pending. Neither police nor Crown lawyers would appear on camera for the story, and police will not elaborate on why they are not prosecuting.
They said the investigation remains open should any further evidence come to light.
However that does not satisfy Young, whose lawyers have told ONE News they have made a complaint about the police conclusions to the Police Commissioner and the Independent Police Conduct Authority.
Quote
nina_s (95 ) 6:41 pm, Mon 30 May #32239
Suddenly we have a vague description of 'untruthful evidence,' from which 'no criminal charges will follow,' Bryan Bruce and Robin Bains' brother are questioning (presumably each other) as to 'why no perjury charges are pending.' Though of course 'police will not elaborate on why they are not prosecuting' despite the fact that the investigation 'remains open should any further evidence come to light.'
But of course the disclaimer is at the outset 'police believe a defence witness in the David Bain retrial gave untruthful evidence' doesn't reveal why the police 'believe' something they can't prove. That was evidenced in the Bain prosecution so is nothing new, the police believing something they can't prove.
There are deliberate and clumsy signs here of propaganda and persecution. Are the public suddenly to believe that complaints to the Police are generally expected to be upheld but not prosecuted, or that the Police believe something of which they do not have proof able to be tested by the Courts? I wonder why Bryan Bruce would receive such a letter which compromises the integrity of the Police generally by making a claim Police have not been able to prove. A letter which he 'releases' to news media in an exercise that without proof promotes his apparent credibility using an acknowledgement that there is no proof and all the while stretching the public's imagination that any complainant to the Police will receive a 'report' 10 months later that they (the Police) believe something they can't prove? This Police Officer is out of line, as is the letter in it's 'personal' tone that implies Brown is right not withstanding that there is no sustainable evidence.
The NZ public deserve more than this, to be so lightly regarded in their intelligence of believing something which isn't proven, or indeed could never be brought to Court because the passage of non-existence evidence has now been 'sold' to the public. Also tactically, how distant from explaining how the father had blood and bruises on his hands of which there is real proof and not proof of evidence yet 'come to life.' Vivian Harrison, Arie Smith, Aaron Farmer also 'enjoyed' the belief of those that lay at their doors claims that couldn't be proved, leaving them besieged by claims that don't sustain any credible inquiry.
So for David Bain, Vivian, Arie and Aaron, and now added to the list Daryl Young - who like Vivian was 'convicted' of nothing more than rumour to protect a failed prosecution, a thought now for the same sword which sought to strike them down, not with truth but with lies - also a time for NZers to expect more and the sword to fall back upon those that 'believe' without proof, but make their allegations anyway.
Another twist has emerged in one of New Zealand's most well-known murder cases.
ONE News can tonight reveal that police believe a defence witness in the David Bain retrial gave "untruthful evidence".
But police will not be taking action against photocopier salesman Daryl Young who gave evidence in the 2009 trial.
Bain was found not guilty of murdering his father, mother, two sisters and brother in a case that has captivated the country for more than 15 years and which has been the subject of huge controversy.
Now more controversy has been added with a letter released to ONE News about Young's evidence.
Young was a late witness in Bain's defence and told of his dealings with David's father, Robin Bain.
In court Young said: "I smelled alcohol and that's why I thought he wasn't at school".
Last year, documentary maker Bryan Bruce challenged the testimony, going as far as to ask police to investigate Young's entire evidence.
The reply came in a letter 10 months later when Detective Senior Sergeant David Harvey said: "I have concluded that untruthful evidence was given by Young. The investigation was referred for legal advice as to whether there was sufficient evidence to support a prosecution for perjury. It was determined that no criminal charges would follow."
However, Young's lawyers have told ONE News that the letter "contains a completely gratuitous and totally unfounded allegation relating to Mr Young".
They say "not only is the allegation completely unfounded, but it's contrary to the Crown's own evidence."
David Bain's defence also rejects the police findings, calling them unadulterated rubbish.
But both Bryan Bruce and Robin Bain's brother are questioning why no perjury charges are pending. Neither police nor Crown lawyers would appear on camera for the story, and police will not elaborate on why they are not prosecuting.
They said the investigation remains open should any further evidence come to light.
However that does not satisfy Young, whose lawyers have told ONE News they have made a complaint about the police conclusions to the Police Commissioner and the Independent Police Conduct Authority.
Quote
nina_s (95 ) 6:41 pm, Mon 30 May #32239
Suddenly we have a vague description of 'untruthful evidence,' from which 'no criminal charges will follow,' Bryan Bruce and Robin Bains' brother are questioning (presumably each other) as to 'why no perjury charges are pending.' Though of course 'police will not elaborate on why they are not prosecuting' despite the fact that the investigation 'remains open should any further evidence come to light.'
But of course the disclaimer is at the outset 'police believe a defence witness in the David Bain retrial gave untruthful evidence' doesn't reveal why the police 'believe' something they can't prove. That was evidenced in the Bain prosecution so is nothing new, the police believing something they can't prove.
There are deliberate and clumsy signs here of propaganda and persecution. Are the public suddenly to believe that complaints to the Police are generally expected to be upheld but not prosecuted, or that the Police believe something of which they do not have proof able to be tested by the Courts? I wonder why Bryan Bruce would receive such a letter which compromises the integrity of the Police generally by making a claim Police have not been able to prove. A letter which he 'releases' to news media in an exercise that without proof promotes his apparent credibility using an acknowledgement that there is no proof and all the while stretching the public's imagination that any complainant to the Police will receive a 'report' 10 months later that they (the Police) believe something they can't prove? This Police Officer is out of line, as is the letter in it's 'personal' tone that implies Brown is right not withstanding that there is no sustainable evidence.
The NZ public deserve more than this, to be so lightly regarded in their intelligence of believing something which isn't proven, or indeed could never be brought to Court because the passage of non-existence evidence has now been 'sold' to the public. Also tactically, how distant from explaining how the father had blood and bruises on his hands of which there is real proof and not proof of evidence yet 'come to life.' Vivian Harrison, Arie Smith, Aaron Farmer also 'enjoyed' the belief of those that lay at their doors claims that couldn't be proved, leaving them besieged by claims that don't sustain any credible inquiry.
So for David Bain, Vivian, Arie and Aaron, and now added to the list Daryl Young - who like Vivian was 'convicted' of nothing more than rumour to protect a failed prosecution, a thought now for the same sword which sought to strike them down, not with truth but with lies - also a time for NZers to expect more and the sword to fall back upon those that 'believe' without proof, but make their allegations anyway.
Wednesday, February 2, 2011
nina-concertina
Sunday, December 19, 2010
Look there, nina_s covering up for fiddlers...
what a shock to find out that nina_concertina wants kiddie fiddling kept secret. I'd hardly have guessed it despite all the clues!
ktodd wrote:
another supporter of child sex crimes are you nina?
hate the messenger if you wish but whats your opinion on whats being released? ALL GOOD i suppose?
Quite right, none of the shite is his, its the powers that try to blind everyone to their will!
Quotesolster (23 ) 6:34 pm, Wed 15 Dec #122
ktodd wrote:
another supporter of child sex crimes are you nina?
hate the messenger if you wish but whats your opinion on whats being released? ALL GOOD i suppose?
Quite right, none of the shite is his, its the powers that try to blind everyone to their will!
Quotesolster (23 ) 6:34 pm, Wed 15 Dec #122
Friday, December 3, 2010
nina_s, a foremost expert of voice analysis
"OK. I've had a chance to listen again, more carefully, at home, to the 111 call.
Parts of it are unusual but, in my opinion, the call is/sounds genuine..."
posted Saturday 23 May 2009 by nina_s
The above relates to the 111 call by David Bain and is in my opinion (and that of Lee Hinkleman) made by the world's foremost authority on voice stress analysis. Which just goes to show, as in nina_concertina's case, that you can be a thick as two short planks, 4ft between the eyes with a butt on you that would do an elephant proud but still be an expert in something. Go nina, spin like a top you moron.
(NOTE: nina_s's post has been slightly edited, to improve clarity)
Parts of it are unusual but, in my opinion, the call is/sounds genuine..."
posted Saturday 23 May 2009 by nina_s
The above relates to the 111 call by David Bain and is in my opinion (and that of Lee Hinkleman) made by the world's foremost authority on voice stress analysis. Which just goes to show, as in nina_concertina's case, that you can be a thick as two short planks, 4ft between the eyes with a butt on you that would do an elephant proud but still be an expert in something. Go nina, spin like a top you moron.
(NOTE: nina_s's post has been slightly edited, to improve clarity)
Wednesday, December 1, 2010
nina_s (Sarah) - two faced much?
There is nothing wrong with Panckhurst.
He is an extremely competent and experienced judge.
Quotenina_s (94 ) 10:31 pm, Tue 30 Nov #11
This from nina_concertina who dined out on the alleged conduct of the Christchurch Jury in the Bain trial just last year. She along with another fat arse, (fat tony) rodney osook (want to be forensic psychiatrist - but actually only a plagiarist) for a considerable period were Panckhurst chief critics, both for his trial rulings but primarily for ignoring 'misconduct' of the Jury, the implication that corruption was afoot and being the reason why the twisted sister hate-siters lost their 'in the bag' trial. You suck Sarah, you're a full of crap spinner with your countless false identities and it is all recorded in a file name 'Defamation nina_s.'
He is an extremely competent and experienced judge.
Quotenina_s (94 ) 10:31 pm, Tue 30 Nov #11
This from nina_concertina who dined out on the alleged conduct of the Christchurch Jury in the Bain trial just last year. She along with another fat arse, (fat tony) rodney osook (want to be forensic psychiatrist - but actually only a plagiarist) for a considerable period were Panckhurst chief critics, both for his trial rulings but primarily for ignoring 'misconduct' of the Jury, the implication that corruption was afoot and being the reason why the twisted sister hate-siters lost their 'in the bag' trial. You suck Sarah, you're a full of crap spinner with your countless false identities and it is all recorded in a file name 'Defamation nina_s.'
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)