All the evidence they didn't want you to know begins to emerge.
The following from the Otago Daily Times review of Karam's book;
On the other hand, Robin, as we have seen from the empirical data, and putting it in plain language, is a dead ringer for the profile of a despairing-type perpetrator of familicide.
A proud man who sees himself as the head of the family, who has been rejected by his wife.
A man who is becoming angry and frustrated at not finding the standard of employment he feels he deserves.
A man suffering shame and ignominy from the lips of his own daughter; true or false as her stories may have been, the shame would be the same.
A man who applied for stress leave not long before the tragedy.
A man tidying up loose ends.
A man said by his peers to have lost the ability to act rationally.
A man who for years had been living in embarrassing conditions in a derelict van in a paddock with no ablution facilities.
A man who according to his very loyal brother was going back home to "face up to it all again", or words to that effect.
A man who had been a hunter and user of firearms all his life.
A man who had two books on his bedside table, each of which involved death as their main theme and the one he appeared to be reading entitled Death Comes as the End.
A man who had a pile of bullet shells fired by the murder weapon on his dresser.
A man who was a very experienced school teacher who sent out a school newsletter just days before the tragedy which included three stories written by his pupils about family slayings and prefaced them with the warning that they may disturb.
A man with a bruise and abrasion on his right fist that had been sustained in the hours before his death.
A man whose wife, 15 years earlier, told her close friend and confidant that she was extremely concerned about "Robin's depression".
A man who ultimately succumbed to the combination of factors that causes some men to take the ultimate revenge on life in the most inexplicable manner, by destroying his life and the lives of those he loves in an act of what we call familicide.
A life long firearm user, who slept at night isolated from his family in a caravan with spent shells from the murder weapon, and a book nearby titled 'Death comes at the End.'
Saturday, February 11, 2012
Thursday, February 9, 2012
An open letter to 'angry' Kent Parker.
I am angry. I am not angry at the prospect of legal action and costs with the defamation suit before me, but with having my right to express myself publicly, about an event that affects the whole community, taken from me.
This from your latest blog Kent, seething with anger. I've speculated that your anger might be the result of a substantial award of costs against you and Purkiss for you so far, 2, failed attempts to file a defence in the High Court at Auckland.
But there are clearly other things at work with you Kent. For a fleeting moment you were courted by the press until it became obvious that your 'campaign' much like your personality was counterfeit. You never cared about the deceased Robin Bain you simply saw an opportunity for yourself to gather a few disaffected kiwis around you, thus promoting your own ambitions. You were never interested in the truth as your continued complete failure to deal with the substantial forensic evidence against Robin Bain shows. You've always known that to look too closely would expose the truth, instead you relied on mantras and distortions of the truth in catch phrases. Your 'opportunities' to misuse the press are gone, no doubt you are seen as a source of danger whose attention to the truth or the rule of law is minimal.
You've had the opportunity to reveal that you were wrong, you could have done that with some dignity but you chose to ride the cress of a long fallen wave to the point of becoming seen as a misguided zealot with an enormous ego. You could still have that opportunity Kent and I will come back to that later. Because now is an appropriate time for you to also realise that you have been used Kent, completely used. Your 'support' team that fed you inside information have gone, leaving you like the pariah you have become. It seems you think of that now and it makes you angry, angry enough to write the last outburst that was your latest blog, angry enough to threaten others in a very public way and to show contempt for the High Court, where you remain a defendant subject to a volume of evidence you produced against yourself in the passing minute of your once fleeting 'power.'
The truth Kent was always going to out. The dead father's bloody and bruised hands were never going to be able to reconciled by anything but the truth and you must now regret not restraining yourself when fed with lies by idiots, and those with something to cover up. You must regret not having had the patience or drive to resolve the evidence of the final death scene before you fluttered off for your moment of fame, and now your even longer time of infamy. Do you realise Kent that David Bain is growing more and more anonymous as time passes while you replace his previously misheld infamy, with your own. He has quietly grown in the truth while you have shrunk before it.
But even that is only partly the reason for your anger. You Kent, know that you've been used. No one knows greater than you that you have been used and discarded. Not a million sausage sizzles, concerts or thousands of signatures, or even the hope of them, will resolve that when you set out, confident that you had found an opportunity in life to launch yourself to fame, confident that you could use others that it was yourself being used.
Where to know Kent as the public fascination of your self destruction continues? Do you continue to fall, surrender what little dignity you might have left, or do you discover within yourself a strength that is always grudgingly admired - admitting you were wrong and come clean? Are your 'friends' at the press ringing you with advice now Kent, returning your emails and calls, the insiders remaining in touch - it must all seem like a Greek tragedy for you now Kent. The longer you persevere with it the more disdain you create for yourself. Are those that supported you with 'facts' now supporting you with money or simply with silence? I think I know the answer to that Kent because you have made public your pleas for money.
I wrote a few days ago that from all reports that you are not a nzer despite commenting a lot using the term 'we' to provide the idea that you were. One day I hope you realise that there are inherent characteristics of nzers, one of which is seeing that people get a 'fair go.' You never gave anybody a 'fair go' Kent, you took part in attacks against people you didn't know, their families as well, by reason that you saw them as an enemy for not being willing to accept your views about the Bain case. You couldn't accept they needed to find their own - realising in a kiwi way that it is important to know the truth before even contemplating throwing stones or ridicule. You denied a number of nzers that Kent, then mocked their 'stupidity.' Alas for you, that has turned about on you the way many nzers believe to be the natural order of these things.
Will you learn from any of that Kent? Do you in fact have any courage, any truth in your heart that would allow you the opportunity to use your blog to apologise to Karam and Bain
I've invited you to contact me here before. I publicly said that I hate your guts, perhaps that might be qualified to: I hate what you have done. But however pragmatism rules, there is always an answer for everything that is better than prolonged, unnecessary, unfruitful war. That offer remains open but I will repeat to you what I've suggested before; come clean Kent, do it on your blog, fill in the gaps, give yourself some credibility and at least the opportunity of having known that you finally had the guts to pull out from the bs. Unreservedly apologise to Karam and David Bain, set the ball rolling, offer to admit the glaringly obvious fact that you have defamed them, try to cut your losses. You know this situation is not one that you can walk away from but you must realise that you can't stop the merrygoround, get off, sincerely look at some compromise that might mitigate the outcomes for you. Your writing recently has had the frenetic tone of someone with nothing to lose, I think you know that you do have something to lose - the opportunity to extricate yourself with some dignity. You might owe it to yourself Kent, because it's plain your former cohorts feel they owe you nothing.
It's a good a time as any Kent because next week 'Trial by Ambush' is released, things will get a whole lot worse for you then Kent - the exposure of the false case against David Bain will be even more evident. Do you need to endure more, or would it be simpler to get off the bus now - nothing is going to get any better on the bandwagon Kent. Karam has called for police officers to out the truth and made an indication that there is 'plenty more dust to settle' regarding your website and the Facebook site JFRB. That's you and the others Kent, 'plenty more dust to settle.' Would you be surprised that there weren't already defections, naming of names. Think Kent, think. An independent QC has written a forward of the obvious, that the investigation, prosecution was 'deeply flawed.' People could be going to prison for this Kent, people for co-operating in that 'deeply flawed' prosecution and it's more recent cover up in which you have obviously been a pawn. Think Kent while there is little time left, do yourself a favour.
This from your latest blog Kent, seething with anger. I've speculated that your anger might be the result of a substantial award of costs against you and Purkiss for you so far, 2, failed attempts to file a defence in the High Court at Auckland.
But there are clearly other things at work with you Kent. For a fleeting moment you were courted by the press until it became obvious that your 'campaign' much like your personality was counterfeit. You never cared about the deceased Robin Bain you simply saw an opportunity for yourself to gather a few disaffected kiwis around you, thus promoting your own ambitions. You were never interested in the truth as your continued complete failure to deal with the substantial forensic evidence against Robin Bain shows. You've always known that to look too closely would expose the truth, instead you relied on mantras and distortions of the truth in catch phrases. Your 'opportunities' to misuse the press are gone, no doubt you are seen as a source of danger whose attention to the truth or the rule of law is minimal.
You've had the opportunity to reveal that you were wrong, you could have done that with some dignity but you chose to ride the cress of a long fallen wave to the point of becoming seen as a misguided zealot with an enormous ego. You could still have that opportunity Kent and I will come back to that later. Because now is an appropriate time for you to also realise that you have been used Kent, completely used. Your 'support' team that fed you inside information have gone, leaving you like the pariah you have become. It seems you think of that now and it makes you angry, angry enough to write the last outburst that was your latest blog, angry enough to threaten others in a very public way and to show contempt for the High Court, where you remain a defendant subject to a volume of evidence you produced against yourself in the passing minute of your once fleeting 'power.'
The truth Kent was always going to out. The dead father's bloody and bruised hands were never going to be able to reconciled by anything but the truth and you must now regret not restraining yourself when fed with lies by idiots, and those with something to cover up. You must regret not having had the patience or drive to resolve the evidence of the final death scene before you fluttered off for your moment of fame, and now your even longer time of infamy. Do you realise Kent that David Bain is growing more and more anonymous as time passes while you replace his previously misheld infamy, with your own. He has quietly grown in the truth while you have shrunk before it.
But even that is only partly the reason for your anger. You Kent, know that you've been used. No one knows greater than you that you have been used and discarded. Not a million sausage sizzles, concerts or thousands of signatures, or even the hope of them, will resolve that when you set out, confident that you had found an opportunity in life to launch yourself to fame, confident that you could use others that it was yourself being used.
Where to know Kent as the public fascination of your self destruction continues? Do you continue to fall, surrender what little dignity you might have left, or do you discover within yourself a strength that is always grudgingly admired - admitting you were wrong and come clean? Are your 'friends' at the press ringing you with advice now Kent, returning your emails and calls, the insiders remaining in touch - it must all seem like a Greek tragedy for you now Kent. The longer you persevere with it the more disdain you create for yourself. Are those that supported you with 'facts' now supporting you with money or simply with silence? I think I know the answer to that Kent because you have made public your pleas for money.
I wrote a few days ago that from all reports that you are not a nzer despite commenting a lot using the term 'we' to provide the idea that you were. One day I hope you realise that there are inherent characteristics of nzers, one of which is seeing that people get a 'fair go.' You never gave anybody a 'fair go' Kent, you took part in attacks against people you didn't know, their families as well, by reason that you saw them as an enemy for not being willing to accept your views about the Bain case. You couldn't accept they needed to find their own - realising in a kiwi way that it is important to know the truth before even contemplating throwing stones or ridicule. You denied a number of nzers that Kent, then mocked their 'stupidity.' Alas for you, that has turned about on you the way many nzers believe to be the natural order of these things.
Will you learn from any of that Kent? Do you in fact have any courage, any truth in your heart that would allow you the opportunity to use your blog to apologise to Karam and Bain
I've invited you to contact me here before. I publicly said that I hate your guts, perhaps that might be qualified to: I hate what you have done. But however pragmatism rules, there is always an answer for everything that is better than prolonged, unnecessary, unfruitful war. That offer remains open but I will repeat to you what I've suggested before; come clean Kent, do it on your blog, fill in the gaps, give yourself some credibility and at least the opportunity of having known that you finally had the guts to pull out from the bs. Unreservedly apologise to Karam and David Bain, set the ball rolling, offer to admit the glaringly obvious fact that you have defamed them, try to cut your losses. You know this situation is not one that you can walk away from but you must realise that you can't stop the merrygoround, get off, sincerely look at some compromise that might mitigate the outcomes for you. Your writing recently has had the frenetic tone of someone with nothing to lose, I think you know that you do have something to lose - the opportunity to extricate yourself with some dignity. You might owe it to yourself Kent, because it's plain your former cohorts feel they owe you nothing.
It's a good a time as any Kent because next week 'Trial by Ambush' is released, things will get a whole lot worse for you then Kent - the exposure of the false case against David Bain will be even more evident. Do you need to endure more, or would it be simpler to get off the bus now - nothing is going to get any better on the bandwagon Kent. Karam has called for police officers to out the truth and made an indication that there is 'plenty more dust to settle' regarding your website and the Facebook site JFRB. That's you and the others Kent, 'plenty more dust to settle.' Would you be surprised that there weren't already defections, naming of names. Think Kent, think. An independent QC has written a forward of the obvious, that the investigation, prosecution was 'deeply flawed.' People could be going to prison for this Kent, people for co-operating in that 'deeply flawed' prosecution and it's more recent cover up in which you have obviously been a pawn. Think Kent while there is little time left, do yourself a favour.
Tuesday, February 7, 2012
Did Kenty get some more bad news?
Excerpts from the latest rantings of 'Kiwi' Kent.
I am angry. I am not angry at the prospect of legal action and costs with the defamation suit before me, but with having my right to express myself publicly, about an event that affects the whole community, taken from me. This is one of the rights that my grandfather fought for in the First World War and which I have learnt that I should keep fighting for. So I will. The media are telling me that they cannot report on the activities of The Justice for Robin Bain Group or counterspin for fear of defamation action. One media outlet is even being sued for writing a story on us. This is a step too far.
Kent claiming that he is not angry about the legal action he faces - when plainly he is. He claims that his grandfather fought for 'Kent's' rights to defame during the first World War. Well, any justification Kent would use he surely would. From all reports 'Kiwi' Kent isn't a Kiwi at all, the same goes for a number of his 'followers.' Like a lot of NZers I had ancestors fighting in the NZ wars, on both sides, enlisted to fight in the Boer War, the first and second World Wars, I can't say with any clarity what each of their reasons were, some simply enlistment - none, I feel confident enough to say to promote the right for Parker and the twisted sisters to spread persecution and hate, if anything the exact opposite.
But what is plain from the above is that Kent has 'lost' the willing ears of the press, he doesn't realise that he's now considered an oddity and a nutter. His claims that the Court action against him effects the whole community are just nonsense, because few in the community are motivated enough, or stupid enough, to publicly defame others and expect nothing to happen.
I'll address this blog post to you, Karam, since I know that your minions gather up all the alleged "evidence" for you and email it to you and you obsessively file it into countless ring binders all neatly numbered and indexed.
Could it be that Kent is exasperated because his defence is not only misconceived, but also messy and disordered, that causes him to be frustrated that Karams is 'all neatly numbered and indexed.'
I am not one to get hot under the collar and pick a fight. I am known to be reticent and mild mannered, but after eighteen months of your incommunicative and oppressive legal action, I have had enough. Your legal suit, as I have said before, is improper, because it has no place in this community. Here we revere and nurture freedom and rights of expression.
Dear Kenty says he's not one to get hot under the collar and pick a fight. But by his writing we see he is hot under the collar - steaming in fact. He says he didn't pick a fight, when in fact he organised a campaign against Karam, Bain, and others that went to the extent of being unlawful. He chose to criminally stalk people, harass and threatened them for the great dream he believes his grandfather created for him - a type of immunity for himself from the law, and a destruction of nzers on the basis of hate and rumour.
But if you do not even sit down and listen to or read what is being demonstrated to you, then how can you find out if you are wrong or not? Instead you take a hammer to the opposition and deal with them as forcefully as possible. You did the same with Rosemary McLeod as you are doing with us. Surely even some of your own supporters would find this a bit extreme.
Kent has this recent fixation with sitting down, he thinks that Karam just needs to sit down and consider carefully that being called a Nazi and having his reputation brought into disrepute, his simply a matter of course. He continues to labour under the impression that he knows all about the Bain case, more than anybody else in fact despite having proved the opposite 100s of times. He deliberately, along with his few supporters, ignores facts like an idiot monkey would do and then simply repeats the lie lodged in the great gap between their ears. That's Kenty's problem, not Karams. He didn't give Kent leeway for being a misinformed idiot, but he did warn him. I seem to recall that I might have warned him myself, but he scoffed and now chokes. He should take his own advice and sit down, frankly consider what an idiot he is. It may not make any difference because I believe idiocy isn't a fleeting condition, but he could go through the motions - perhaps while on the outhouse.
Your defamation suit is also vexatious because you do not really want it to go to trial. You do not want a trial because you do not want your activities in relation to the Bain case, or the influences you had on the 2009 retrial jury, such as what is documented on this site, made public. You just hope that we will get bogged down in legal costs and complexities and give up. Well, that's not going to happen.
He keeps saying the suit is vexatious, but plainly the Courts don't think so. They've in fact informed him that he hasn't provided a proper defence despite Karam's counsel trying teach him how to spell and inviting him nicely to stop picking your nose. I think that advice costs about $20 per minute and that's probably upsets him - all the people he thought would be impressed, think he's probably deluded, just like his writing shows.
Your defamation action is puerile and stupid. I retain the right to say that, and when it is all over I will be publishing many of the comments we made which you claim are defamatory so the public can see just how puerile and stupid it is. Your only purpose here is to attempt to shut us up. So, in response, I personally will make it my duty to ensure that as many people as possible read the contents of this website. I will be promoting it wherever I go in as many forms as I can. You will be surprised at the places I might end up finding myself in. Any number of the 600 members of the Justice for Robin Bain Group, which covers the entire country, will be doing the same or similar. I firmly believe with all the power invested in me by my education and upbringing, that the contents of this website are legitimate and truthful and I will fight, like my grandfather did, to retain my right to express it. I will never surrender.
I suspect Kent had tears in his eyes when he wrote that. A man full of self pity. Who claims he will never surrender when he already has - surrendered to stupidity when a common sense solution was offered to him. He appears to be closer than he realises to be heading to prison, publishing public threats like this when the case is before the Courts. We could see a motion seeking a conviction for Contempt of Court lodged anytime, or even the Court taking the step on its own volition.
This is a politial / social issue and we have the right to discuss it. I am not going to wait for any judgment from a jury in any defamation trial to determine that. I am going to use my own judgment about whether or not it should be disseminated, by acting now. I will have 10,000 signatures on the counterspin petition before the Minister of Justice announces the result of the compensation bid and I will do what I can to get into whatever media spotlights I can to promote our side of the story. You have no idea what I can do.
More threats. A projection that the Bain case is political, when in fact it is a criminal case. An implication that either Parker or Karam are politicians, or politically motivated - more nonsense from a desperate man. Though it is to be admitted that Kent Parker at one stage believed he was so popular that he would start a political party and contest the last election, that is until the crap started drying on his chin.
You cannot sue everybody. I, and the other members of the Justice for Robin Bain Group will make it especially hard work for you to continue to peddle what we consider are extremely distorted views of the facts of the Bain case. I do not begrudge David his Not Guilty verdict. Well done. But the verdict is too unsafe for the kinds of conclusions that you continue to promote and our job is to ensure that your arguments are balanced up with suitably opposing ones and thus create a more balanced perspective for the public to consume.
More unbalanced nonsense and threats. If I were a confidant of Parker I would be concerned of Warrants for Arrest and Seizure being sworn because, although Parker sees interference in the Judicial Process as legit, the Courts don't. Parker has thought it his right to spread propaganda about the Bain case and now about his own case. I see a relationship between the 2, and those that fed Parker the lies or carried out his stalking and public harassment might now more clearly see the danger their actions have brought - and the danger that is a cornered and desperate Kent Parker is to them, and in the wider picture to Justice within this Country.
I am angry. I am not angry at the prospect of legal action and costs with the defamation suit before me, but with having my right to express myself publicly, about an event that affects the whole community, taken from me. This is one of the rights that my grandfather fought for in the First World War and which I have learnt that I should keep fighting for. So I will. The media are telling me that they cannot report on the activities of The Justice for Robin Bain Group or counterspin for fear of defamation action. One media outlet is even being sued for writing a story on us. This is a step too far.
Kent claiming that he is not angry about the legal action he faces - when plainly he is. He claims that his grandfather fought for 'Kent's' rights to defame during the first World War. Well, any justification Kent would use he surely would. From all reports 'Kiwi' Kent isn't a Kiwi at all, the same goes for a number of his 'followers.' Like a lot of NZers I had ancestors fighting in the NZ wars, on both sides, enlisted to fight in the Boer War, the first and second World Wars, I can't say with any clarity what each of their reasons were, some simply enlistment - none, I feel confident enough to say to promote the right for Parker and the twisted sisters to spread persecution and hate, if anything the exact opposite.
But what is plain from the above is that Kent has 'lost' the willing ears of the press, he doesn't realise that he's now considered an oddity and a nutter. His claims that the Court action against him effects the whole community are just nonsense, because few in the community are motivated enough, or stupid enough, to publicly defame others and expect nothing to happen.
I'll address this blog post to you, Karam, since I know that your minions gather up all the alleged "evidence" for you and email it to you and you obsessively file it into countless ring binders all neatly numbered and indexed.
Could it be that Kent is exasperated because his defence is not only misconceived, but also messy and disordered, that causes him to be frustrated that Karams is 'all neatly numbered and indexed.'
I am not one to get hot under the collar and pick a fight. I am known to be reticent and mild mannered, but after eighteen months of your incommunicative and oppressive legal action, I have had enough. Your legal suit, as I have said before, is improper, because it has no place in this community. Here we revere and nurture freedom and rights of expression.
Dear Kenty says he's not one to get hot under the collar and pick a fight. But by his writing we see he is hot under the collar - steaming in fact. He says he didn't pick a fight, when in fact he organised a campaign against Karam, Bain, and others that went to the extent of being unlawful. He chose to criminally stalk people, harass and threatened them for the great dream he believes his grandfather created for him - a type of immunity for himself from the law, and a destruction of nzers on the basis of hate and rumour.
But if you do not even sit down and listen to or read what is being demonstrated to you, then how can you find out if you are wrong or not? Instead you take a hammer to the opposition and deal with them as forcefully as possible. You did the same with Rosemary McLeod as you are doing with us. Surely even some of your own supporters would find this a bit extreme.
Kent has this recent fixation with sitting down, he thinks that Karam just needs to sit down and consider carefully that being called a Nazi and having his reputation brought into disrepute, his simply a matter of course. He continues to labour under the impression that he knows all about the Bain case, more than anybody else in fact despite having proved the opposite 100s of times. He deliberately, along with his few supporters, ignores facts like an idiot monkey would do and then simply repeats the lie lodged in the great gap between their ears. That's Kenty's problem, not Karams. He didn't give Kent leeway for being a misinformed idiot, but he did warn him. I seem to recall that I might have warned him myself, but he scoffed and now chokes. He should take his own advice and sit down, frankly consider what an idiot he is. It may not make any difference because I believe idiocy isn't a fleeting condition, but he could go through the motions - perhaps while on the outhouse.
Your defamation suit is also vexatious because you do not really want it to go to trial. You do not want a trial because you do not want your activities in relation to the Bain case, or the influences you had on the 2009 retrial jury, such as what is documented on this site, made public. You just hope that we will get bogged down in legal costs and complexities and give up. Well, that's not going to happen.
He keeps saying the suit is vexatious, but plainly the Courts don't think so. They've in fact informed him that he hasn't provided a proper defence despite Karam's counsel trying teach him how to spell and inviting him nicely to stop picking your nose. I think that advice costs about $20 per minute and that's probably upsets him - all the people he thought would be impressed, think he's probably deluded, just like his writing shows.
Your defamation action is puerile and stupid. I retain the right to say that, and when it is all over I will be publishing many of the comments we made which you claim are defamatory so the public can see just how puerile and stupid it is. Your only purpose here is to attempt to shut us up. So, in response, I personally will make it my duty to ensure that as many people as possible read the contents of this website. I will be promoting it wherever I go in as many forms as I can. You will be surprised at the places I might end up finding myself in. Any number of the 600 members of the Justice for Robin Bain Group, which covers the entire country, will be doing the same or similar. I firmly believe with all the power invested in me by my education and upbringing, that the contents of this website are legitimate and truthful and I will fight, like my grandfather did, to retain my right to express it. I will never surrender.
I suspect Kent had tears in his eyes when he wrote that. A man full of self pity. Who claims he will never surrender when he already has - surrendered to stupidity when a common sense solution was offered to him. He appears to be closer than he realises to be heading to prison, publishing public threats like this when the case is before the Courts. We could see a motion seeking a conviction for Contempt of Court lodged anytime, or even the Court taking the step on its own volition.
This is a politial / social issue and we have the right to discuss it. I am not going to wait for any judgment from a jury in any defamation trial to determine that. I am going to use my own judgment about whether or not it should be disseminated, by acting now. I will have 10,000 signatures on the counterspin petition before the Minister of Justice announces the result of the compensation bid and I will do what I can to get into whatever media spotlights I can to promote our side of the story. You have no idea what I can do.
More threats. A projection that the Bain case is political, when in fact it is a criminal case. An implication that either Parker or Karam are politicians, or politically motivated - more nonsense from a desperate man. Though it is to be admitted that Kent Parker at one stage believed he was so popular that he would start a political party and contest the last election, that is until the crap started drying on his chin.
You cannot sue everybody. I, and the other members of the Justice for Robin Bain Group will make it especially hard work for you to continue to peddle what we consider are extremely distorted views of the facts of the Bain case. I do not begrudge David his Not Guilty verdict. Well done. But the verdict is too unsafe for the kinds of conclusions that you continue to promote and our job is to ensure that your arguments are balanced up with suitably opposing ones and thus create a more balanced perspective for the public to consume.
More unbalanced nonsense and threats. If I were a confidant of Parker I would be concerned of Warrants for Arrest and Seizure being sworn because, although Parker sees interference in the Judicial Process as legit, the Courts don't. Parker has thought it his right to spread propaganda about the Bain case and now about his own case. I see a relationship between the 2, and those that fed Parker the lies or carried out his stalking and public harassment might now more clearly see the danger their actions have brought - and the danger that is a cornered and desperate Kent Parker is to them, and in the wider picture to Justice within this Country.
Monday, February 6, 2012
Justice Binnie keeps his gunpowder dry.
I recall the evening the 5 not guilty verdicts were found in the Bain case. My best description is that I was just left cold, a measure of excitement to some degree because 'I'd had my say' publicly about the case. Reached a conclusion from which evidence I knew but also because I'd been unable to accept the case built against David Bain, mostly because it defied common sense in a number of ways - just a few I'll mention here.
Laniet Bain didn't co-operate in her own death by offering David an alibi from years before the murder when she told numerous people including her doctor that her father was molesting her.
David Bain would not have needed to panic on the morning of the murders by 'suddenly' dropping lives cartridge shells about his room.
Nor would he have needed to have been 'seen' on his paper round because the papers were delivered, no one could ever suggest they'd been delivered by anyone but David. He didn't need to be jumping in and out of bushes in order to be seen, or knocking on customer's doors.
His hands were clean and his fathers were battered, bruised and bloody.
That will do, and I don't here begin to mention the 'quality' of the police case or the evidence they hid, in every case unfavourable to David and not the Crown.
Police don't 'build' a case, they collect evidence, piece it together into a narrative, but in the Bain murders they did 'build' a case, by not investigating the real killer; Robin Bain, by not seeing the evidence of murder suicide presented to them in the lounge, instead choosing to ignore forensics, be 'blind and sympathetic' in favour of the poor, devout, man praying in a house of death, not knowing of the dead about him, wearing dirty clothes but no underwear.
Binnie it seems is clear on all this from the outset, having no doubt transversed the trial evidence, with held evidence, submissions an so forth. In a blow to the hate-sites he will not be considering the dis-credited IPCA report, various favourite books loved by the hate-siters, magazine articles and stupid tv shows. He won't look at the book of Sir James, realising that it is out dated by the evidence, and nothing written that was not able to consider facts which later emerged can be relevant in any critical way. He won't look at the incoherent ramblings of Kent Parker and the twisted sisters, nor accept their 'petition.'
He will of course, as the news tells us, read two of Karam's earlier books. 2 books which most know contained some mistakes but which however, by the test of time, were on the money - David's innocence. I admit having read none of the books in their entirity, having been more interested in the mechanics of Robin's suicide, on whether David was strip searched and forensically tested, whether the father was - or if all potenetial sexual elements to the crimes were investigated.
Having less interest than earlier in the details of the case - because David has won his freedom with the help of Joe Karam, and no doubt many scores of others who have been supporters nearing 2 decades, I'm interested, none the less, in the compensation claim and what might result to the benefit of the NZ Justice system. Binnie is clear minded, not vested with any interest other than the truth and the motivation of those that persecuted David Bain, within and without, the judicial system. Those to me will be the fruits of this exercise, as I already understand that the chances of David not being compensated are low. I feel the persecution that has befallen him by Parker, O Brien, Curran, Williams and co, needs to be evaluated to give a complete picture of the injustice wrought against David Bain. This picture becomes an important one for Justice in NZ into the future, it just might be the one that tips the teetering balance of the Thomas, Watson, Peter Ellis and give a more accessibility to Justice to the wrongly imprisoned.
If any of this speculation is ultimately correct, then Justice Binnie's desire to read Karam's books won't be a curiosity to learn more about the case than what the evidence shows, but rather an opportunity to 'see' what was abroad in the public consciousness about a case, that will prove to be probably the most unconscionable in NZ history, not fitted for 1, murder even 2 - but indeed 5, while a Justice system sat silent, investigators hid their crimes before willing lawyers.
Laniet Bain didn't co-operate in her own death by offering David an alibi from years before the murder when she told numerous people including her doctor that her father was molesting her.
David Bain would not have needed to panic on the morning of the murders by 'suddenly' dropping lives cartridge shells about his room.
Nor would he have needed to have been 'seen' on his paper round because the papers were delivered, no one could ever suggest they'd been delivered by anyone but David. He didn't need to be jumping in and out of bushes in order to be seen, or knocking on customer's doors.
His hands were clean and his fathers were battered, bruised and bloody.
That will do, and I don't here begin to mention the 'quality' of the police case or the evidence they hid, in every case unfavourable to David and not the Crown.
Police don't 'build' a case, they collect evidence, piece it together into a narrative, but in the Bain murders they did 'build' a case, by not investigating the real killer; Robin Bain, by not seeing the evidence of murder suicide presented to them in the lounge, instead choosing to ignore forensics, be 'blind and sympathetic' in favour of the poor, devout, man praying in a house of death, not knowing of the dead about him, wearing dirty clothes but no underwear.
Binnie it seems is clear on all this from the outset, having no doubt transversed the trial evidence, with held evidence, submissions an so forth. In a blow to the hate-sites he will not be considering the dis-credited IPCA report, various favourite books loved by the hate-siters, magazine articles and stupid tv shows. He won't look at the book of Sir James, realising that it is out dated by the evidence, and nothing written that was not able to consider facts which later emerged can be relevant in any critical way. He won't look at the incoherent ramblings of Kent Parker and the twisted sisters, nor accept their 'petition.'
He will of course, as the news tells us, read two of Karam's earlier books. 2 books which most know contained some mistakes but which however, by the test of time, were on the money - David's innocence. I admit having read none of the books in their entirity, having been more interested in the mechanics of Robin's suicide, on whether David was strip searched and forensically tested, whether the father was - or if all potenetial sexual elements to the crimes were investigated.
Having less interest than earlier in the details of the case - because David has won his freedom with the help of Joe Karam, and no doubt many scores of others who have been supporters nearing 2 decades, I'm interested, none the less, in the compensation claim and what might result to the benefit of the NZ Justice system. Binnie is clear minded, not vested with any interest other than the truth and the motivation of those that persecuted David Bain, within and without, the judicial system. Those to me will be the fruits of this exercise, as I already understand that the chances of David not being compensated are low. I feel the persecution that has befallen him by Parker, O Brien, Curran, Williams and co, needs to be evaluated to give a complete picture of the injustice wrought against David Bain. This picture becomes an important one for Justice in NZ into the future, it just might be the one that tips the teetering balance of the Thomas, Watson, Peter Ellis and give a more accessibility to Justice to the wrongly imprisoned.
If any of this speculation is ultimately correct, then Justice Binnie's desire to read Karam's books won't be a curiosity to learn more about the case than what the evidence shows, but rather an opportunity to 'see' what was abroad in the public consciousness about a case, that will prove to be probably the most unconscionable in NZ history, not fitted for 1, murder even 2 - but indeed 5, while a Justice system sat silent, investigators hid their crimes before willing lawyers.
Thursday, February 2, 2012
Kent Parker and Ralph Taylor - schizoid much?
Lesson number 356.2089 for hate-siters - try to be consistent, act with unity, and avoid perceptions that you are actually nuts.
Taken from Kent's own handbook, pretty basic, considered to a point - but what happens after the children read it?
First of all Kent hears that David Bain is going to speak at an International Justice Conference, after 2 weeks of depression Kent decides to act. In the first instance he invites himself to speak at the Justice Conference but that is rejected. Following another 2 weeks in the doldrums he launches a campaign using 4 or 5 of the other nutters using various names, in the 'belief' that the Conference organisers either don't know who David is or what he's 'done.' They use the argument that it isn't 'proper' while the compensation claim is being considered, and a lot of other nonsense that ignores that David was found not guilty. Result they get banned. Kent however believes that David has been removed as a key note speaker and crows loudly about it in his outhouse before finding out that David remains a key note, and important speaker. You guessed it, doldrums again.
Meanwhile Taylor, who has been fiddling with himself throughout all this and otherwise acting objectionably, launches a campaign on another message board. But in true dimwit fashion and ignoring; Lesson number 356.2089 for hate-siters, he calls for David to speak out. Even suggests a speaking tour which presumably Ralph can follow by looking through windows and fiddling. Both Ralph and Kent say they believe in the law and Justice but as we can see they don't, they're not satisfied with a trial they also want a 'speaking tour' from which no doubt they hope to find reason to continue to persecute Bain and reject our system of Justice. That's why they're hate-siters folks, pure dimwits full of hate who can't accept their own shortcomings but who must find in the world somebody at who they can throw stones, jeer and mock.
Taken from Kent's own handbook, pretty basic, considered to a point - but what happens after the children read it?
First of all Kent hears that David Bain is going to speak at an International Justice Conference, after 2 weeks of depression Kent decides to act. In the first instance he invites himself to speak at the Justice Conference but that is rejected. Following another 2 weeks in the doldrums he launches a campaign using 4 or 5 of the other nutters using various names, in the 'belief' that the Conference organisers either don't know who David is or what he's 'done.' They use the argument that it isn't 'proper' while the compensation claim is being considered, and a lot of other nonsense that ignores that David was found not guilty. Result they get banned. Kent however believes that David has been removed as a key note speaker and crows loudly about it in his outhouse before finding out that David remains a key note, and important speaker. You guessed it, doldrums again.
Meanwhile Taylor, who has been fiddling with himself throughout all this and otherwise acting objectionably, launches a campaign on another message board. But in true dimwit fashion and ignoring; Lesson number 356.2089 for hate-siters, he calls for David to speak out. Even suggests a speaking tour which presumably Ralph can follow by looking through windows and fiddling. Both Ralph and Kent say they believe in the law and Justice but as we can see they don't, they're not satisfied with a trial they also want a 'speaking tour' from which no doubt they hope to find reason to continue to persecute Bain and reject our system of Justice. That's why they're hate-siters folks, pure dimwits full of hate who can't accept their own shortcomings but who must find in the world somebody at who they can throw stones, jeer and mock.
Tuesday, January 31, 2012
N Z Herald on Kit Dotcom (Imperial granny can't keep it up, just like grandad)
Today the Editor of the N Z Herald steps in to shore up the ill at ease about the NZ Government's involvement in surrendering one of it's residents to the United States following an over the top 'raid' probably unparalleled in NZ history.
The editorial quotes Kit Dotcom as saying that he and his 3 co-defendants have nothing to hide and therefore the editor points out that they should therefore not resist deportation to face the charges. Clearly the editor is naive enough to consider that having nothing to hide equates in full measure to a belief that the United States authorities are playing with a straight bat. Of course this is despite the international concern that the United States are acting on behalf of private interests in what in other jurisdictions, if provable, would result in civil action. Additionally, the editor also fails to realise that while hopefully Dotcom and his fellows would not be subjected to a 'rendition' in order to find out the 'truth,' it might well be that Dotcom's confidence is not high in the US Government. Having reached that point after considering the nature of his arrest, that his business has been closed down whilst he remains without any conviction on any of the charges brought against him, and certainly not withstanding that the 'good faith' employed by the FBI saw the FBI effectively take ownership of the property of users of the megaupload site - some would call that theft.
Consider say a police exercise targeting an individual home-owner, but which for some reason requires a general evacuation for safety reasons of 30 surrounding houses. The owners co-operate, the arrest is successful but then the police don't lift the evacuation order, but instead confiscate the homes. Effectively users of Dotcom's site have had their property taken, not just in circumstances of a specific evaluation of their property and perhaps it's connection to the charges, but every one's property regardless of the circumstances.
All so think of an implicit message the actions of the FBI have shown to internet users - 'if you belong to a site of interest to us, not only might we close the site down, but we will take any of your property stored there regardless of your property rights.' To me that makes good reason why Dotcom probably realises that he shouldn't in anyway co-operate with the task ahead of him by surrendering what rights he has after others have already been stripped from him.
Even the money which Dotcom is said to have made and invested in NZ to the satisfaction of the authorities now becomes reason for the Herald wishing to see him taken from these shores as soon as possible and into an uncertain future far from a level playing field. Where once Dotcom was celebrated as an investor in NZ, a resident, and now millions of dollars worse off for the 'experience' he should be immediately placed into the hands of our overseas masters, discarded it seems.
The Herald discusses copyright laws, concluding 'but countries such as ours should be unequivocal in their support of efforts to police global copyright.' The Herald rightly points out that 'masters' in this scheme invest heavily in their technology under a Hollywood brand of film and music. However, heavy investment that ultimately costs end users more money and limited choice has always been superseded throughout the ages because of demand for popular goods and a resistance to wealthy cliques, or providers, benefiting from a captive audience that has no choice.
It's far from clear what the case against Kit Dotcom might be, or the validity of the charges he faces and indeed what protection he has due to his rights as a NZ resident. But something which is clear is that he's been dealt with heavy-handedly and out of all proportion to say crimes of violence, or those where the victims are left in poverty, losing their homes or something of that nature. He's also been seen to have been dealt with using maximum 'dramatic effect,' his victims are those whose revenue in even a small period of time could eclipse that of many of our larger businesses in a whole financial year, even his customers have been dealt to, stolen from. The Herald sees Dotcom as slaying his own golden goose, however millions of users are looking for more cost efficient access to products of their desire, artists support less 'conformity' to the requirements of cartels who look only to produce bigger golden eggs despite the fact that cyber technology and the way people do business continues to evolve. The story of the Golden Goose is century's old, a wonderful simple illustration of the dangers of greed. Both films and cartoons have featured the story, Hollywood films with no doubt Hollywood music scores - but who is it that time will reveal has slain the Goose, having it trapped for so long and to the point of being unable to discern greed from fable.
The editorial quotes Kit Dotcom as saying that he and his 3 co-defendants have nothing to hide and therefore the editor points out that they should therefore not resist deportation to face the charges. Clearly the editor is naive enough to consider that having nothing to hide equates in full measure to a belief that the United States authorities are playing with a straight bat. Of course this is despite the international concern that the United States are acting on behalf of private interests in what in other jurisdictions, if provable, would result in civil action. Additionally, the editor also fails to realise that while hopefully Dotcom and his fellows would not be subjected to a 'rendition' in order to find out the 'truth,' it might well be that Dotcom's confidence is not high in the US Government. Having reached that point after considering the nature of his arrest, that his business has been closed down whilst he remains without any conviction on any of the charges brought against him, and certainly not withstanding that the 'good faith' employed by the FBI saw the FBI effectively take ownership of the property of users of the megaupload site - some would call that theft.
Consider say a police exercise targeting an individual home-owner, but which for some reason requires a general evacuation for safety reasons of 30 surrounding houses. The owners co-operate, the arrest is successful but then the police don't lift the evacuation order, but instead confiscate the homes. Effectively users of Dotcom's site have had their property taken, not just in circumstances of a specific evaluation of their property and perhaps it's connection to the charges, but every one's property regardless of the circumstances.
All so think of an implicit message the actions of the FBI have shown to internet users - 'if you belong to a site of interest to us, not only might we close the site down, but we will take any of your property stored there regardless of your property rights.' To me that makes good reason why Dotcom probably realises that he shouldn't in anyway co-operate with the task ahead of him by surrendering what rights he has after others have already been stripped from him.
Even the money which Dotcom is said to have made and invested in NZ to the satisfaction of the authorities now becomes reason for the Herald wishing to see him taken from these shores as soon as possible and into an uncertain future far from a level playing field. Where once Dotcom was celebrated as an investor in NZ, a resident, and now millions of dollars worse off for the 'experience' he should be immediately placed into the hands of our overseas masters, discarded it seems.
The Herald discusses copyright laws, concluding 'but countries such as ours should be unequivocal in their support of efforts to police global copyright.' The Herald rightly points out that 'masters' in this scheme invest heavily in their technology under a Hollywood brand of film and music. However, heavy investment that ultimately costs end users more money and limited choice has always been superseded throughout the ages because of demand for popular goods and a resistance to wealthy cliques, or providers, benefiting from a captive audience that has no choice.
It's far from clear what the case against Kit Dotcom might be, or the validity of the charges he faces and indeed what protection he has due to his rights as a NZ resident. But something which is clear is that he's been dealt with heavy-handedly and out of all proportion to say crimes of violence, or those where the victims are left in poverty, losing their homes or something of that nature. He's also been seen to have been dealt with using maximum 'dramatic effect,' his victims are those whose revenue in even a small period of time could eclipse that of many of our larger businesses in a whole financial year, even his customers have been dealt to, stolen from. The Herald sees Dotcom as slaying his own golden goose, however millions of users are looking for more cost efficient access to products of their desire, artists support less 'conformity' to the requirements of cartels who look only to produce bigger golden eggs despite the fact that cyber technology and the way people do business continues to evolve. The story of the Golden Goose is century's old, a wonderful simple illustration of the dangers of greed. Both films and cartoons have featured the story, Hollywood films with no doubt Hollywood music scores - but who is it that time will reveal has slain the Goose, having it trapped for so long and to the point of being unable to discern greed from fable.
Monday, January 30, 2012
Kent to Purkiss. A proven mad man addressing an imbecile.
Vic Pur
> Could we re-present the petition to the MOJ? Wouldnt they have to include
> it in papers present to the judge?
Kent Parker
> No it is not relevant to the case. But it gives members of the public an
> opportunity to express their opinions about it. Any kind of criminal trial
> is a public event and all members of the public are entitled to
> participate or give an opinion if they wish. This is a basic right.
The ever hopeful Purkiss imagines that a petition which numerous people have signed more than once, which was in the control of a illegitimate 'hate site' might somehow be worthy of consideration when deciding Bain's compensation bid. He obviously imagines that a petition that managed to at least find a few hundred nutters that might sign it, and who in the majority are sicko hate-siters, is of some material value. The poor sad bloke, I wonder if shock treatment might help after a plant transplant from a snail as a donor?
Kent, sly devil he is, paranoid self-lover, knows there's no chance because the Ministry have already told him they don't deal with nutters who can't control the urge to sign petitions in as many names they can think of before starting again on the next page in the same manner. So he explains a current delusion that 'all members of the public' are entitled to 'participate' in a criminal trial. Why yes Kent, I seem to recall you sitting on the bench waving at the TV cameras during the Bain trial in Christchurch, pushing the Judge out of his seat in your excitement, and I also recall Christine Williams and Annette Curran holding effigies aloft in from of the Jury and trying to set them alight as an expression of their opinion and their public 'rights.'
Old Kenty has no idea at all, the public don't take part in trials, the public also don't have the right to express opinions in a way that is defamatory or hateful. If the world was, and how Kenty now, wishes us somehow to believe, that the hate-siters were good folk, simply expressing an informed opinion based on facts and of public importance he and Purkiss would not be facing 100s of defamation charges while 16 others wait in the wings ever-hopeful they'll not be dragged further into the litigation than just by name - another interesting story yet to be revealed.
> Could we re-present the petition to the MOJ? Wouldnt they have to include
> it in papers present to the judge?
Kent Parker
> No it is not relevant to the case. But it gives members of the public an
> opportunity to express their opinions about it. Any kind of criminal trial
> is a public event and all members of the public are entitled to
> participate or give an opinion if they wish. This is a basic right.
The ever hopeful Purkiss imagines that a petition which numerous people have signed more than once, which was in the control of a illegitimate 'hate site' might somehow be worthy of consideration when deciding Bain's compensation bid. He obviously imagines that a petition that managed to at least find a few hundred nutters that might sign it, and who in the majority are sicko hate-siters, is of some material value. The poor sad bloke, I wonder if shock treatment might help after a plant transplant from a snail as a donor?
Kent, sly devil he is, paranoid self-lover, knows there's no chance because the Ministry have already told him they don't deal with nutters who can't control the urge to sign petitions in as many names they can think of before starting again on the next page in the same manner. So he explains a current delusion that 'all members of the public' are entitled to 'participate' in a criminal trial. Why yes Kent, I seem to recall you sitting on the bench waving at the TV cameras during the Bain trial in Christchurch, pushing the Judge out of his seat in your excitement, and I also recall Christine Williams and Annette Curran holding effigies aloft in from of the Jury and trying to set them alight as an expression of their opinion and their public 'rights.'
Old Kenty has no idea at all, the public don't take part in trials, the public also don't have the right to express opinions in a way that is defamatory or hateful. If the world was, and how Kenty now, wishes us somehow to believe, that the hate-siters were good folk, simply expressing an informed opinion based on facts and of public importance he and Purkiss would not be facing 100s of defamation charges while 16 others wait in the wings ever-hopeful they'll not be dragged further into the litigation than just by name - another interesting story yet to be revealed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)