Wednesday, October 16, 2013

Kent Parker - can it get any crazier?

I know a number of people have looked forward to today with some anticipation of finally seeing Kent and Vic Purkiss's defamation trial start. It was long ago predicted that the trial would not become a venue for Kent's ego and wacky ideas. In fact much of his intended defence was struck out earlier, some of the dimwits he intended to call weren't considered either credible or material to a defence against defamation. I've suggested in the past that maybe Kent or Vic would do a runner, and it appears that Vic Purkiss has indeed 'hit the toe.'

I have mixed feelings about that because of reports that his wife is poorly. Taking into account many of those that objected, or do object, to Counterspin and JFRB is because of attacks on family members or threats of attacks against the children and families of those that oppose the hate-campaigners - I feel with certainty that there is no pleasure felt for the difficulties Parker and co have caused their own families because that would make those that oppose them no different than them. An importance difference between the sides has always been to observe the truth knowing how dangerous, and what harm lies can cause. When Auckland school teacher Christine Williams threatened to send Mongrel Mob members to my house, or to 'rescue' my children and wife to the chortles and glee of other hate-siters there was no response in kind. No debasing a protest that it wasn't right to 'stalk' and threaten others to prove who was right and who was wrong. When Williams and others laid false complaints raised from their imaginations with police, and anyone else who would listen, it was important not to be drawn down to that level. To have done so would not honour an interest in Justice, in fact it would dishonour it in the same way the hate-siters have done.

Another reason I have mixed feelings is because of how unworthy an opponent Parker and co have shown themselves to be - something which has been indicated throughout by their lies. If somebody is right, why do they need to lie? Detective Jones showed that during the retrial where he admitted to lying in order to help the Jury understand the truth. How apt those words were for the description of what Parker, Williams and others have done. Here now is the reason not to have responded in kind because the very argument used to persecute David Bain has been a lie, and to respond with lies would have been the same as using the logic of Jones. The same also as Martin Van Beynan stalking jurors and demanding information from them, writing about the trial but leaving out key evidence that would have exposed that he too was on a campaign. Elsewhere in this blog are shown links between the hate-sites, their members and Van Beynan. Make no mistake the machinations of the hate-sites was wide spread, used as they often were by those that 'fed' them lies to compliment their own

By now it will have been decided if a summary Judgement has been entered against Vic Purkiss and no doubt tomorrow or soon after the Judge will find against Parker. It seems, predictably that Parker was cautioned many times today not use his opportunity to cross examine in order to make statements - read speeches. So a prediction of mine that he may well be placed in Contempt of Court may still happen. Michael Reed expressed in his opening what has long been obvious: that there was no campaign for 'Justice' for Robin Bain but that it was a vehicle to express hatred against Karam, Bain or anyone that might not agree with that expression of hatred.

I started off this blog by asking the question as to whether or not Parker can get any crazier. Of course he can because we have already seen a lunatic leading a bunch of other nuts on a hate-campaign, culminating in a High Court Trial where a defendant(s) is given the attention so desperately craved. One who sits looking a paperwork with interest as though the written word and truth were the currency of his endeavour, rather than spite and evil.

Monday, October 14, 2013

Tough week for the 'hang bainers.'

Started out promising enough with police 'rejecting' the suggested evidence from David Giles that there was the probability of the gunshot residue showing on the thumb of Robin Bain in a crime scene photo. The rejoicing became somewhat muted when the nutjobs read the released reports instead of just salivating over the 'headlines'. There it was revealed that the ESIR scientist was unable to rule out that it was gsr and the police confirmed lines that were visible (but said not to exist by many of the gabbling sisters) were possibly from aged injuries. Of course the police didn't have the support of their own pathologist who had earlier said there were no marks present on the thumb in the morgue. So more on that to come.

It was with some excitement that a recycled 'mama' with a thing about donkeys was a candidate for mayor, as she, it, her, had done many times before only to discover that her previous rejection by her own town wasn't a transient situation but permanent. Now there may be questions for that same person as to whether a stalker and member of a hate-site is a fit and proper person to be at the Bar. The sisters were being rejected all round while one of their number again publicised a paedophile bent on line, only to snivel off and complain when the natural accusations were levelled against him or her, that attempting to excuse acts of paedophilia are actually supporting such acts. The dirty side to the sisters revealed once again., not one of them taking umbrage that the dirty old coot should express his 'benign' acceptance of acts that don't warrant mentioning here.

As these ducks of failure line up, hovering above has been the spectre of the ultimate betrayal of one another that is the 'sisterhood' - the defamation trial of Parker and Purkiss which begins today. For the man who considered he would start a political party on the strength of the number of members of his hate-sites his support has largely gone. He's been left to it, used and abused by those that now slink back into the shadows, some of whom have changed not only their cyber identities but their real identities, one such person being Annette Curran who introduced 'stalking' as a tool for the twisted sisters.

Today has been put aside for Legal argument and pre-trial matters. With large swathes excised by the Courts from their original defence Kent and Vic will have even less by the end of the day. While due process must be observed at all costs it sees inevitable that the 2 men will have little  of any substance to offer as a defence. Even a late swerve away and putting some of the blame on other members of the group will be too little too late. The words 'right thinking New Zealanders' will be consigned to history as the catch cry of modern day witches and a lynch mob fascinated by fire at night and the hangman's noose. No wonder they now cringe from the light. Does just one of them have the fortitude or strength of character to apologise. the ability to accept their own short comings and accept that it was self-hate and inadequacy that drove them on in their lust for blood and violence - I wouldn't bet on it.

Do they ponder now the 'mountain of evidence' now evaporated into tearful mist, the lies about strip searches and the planting of evidence, the leadership of the garbage written by Van Beynan as he stalked jurors and omitted the truth that always proved Robin's guilt - certainly not, because those with that capacity long ago left the ranks realising the mistake and the bizarre surroundings of 'right thinking New Zealanders' who saw it as right to lie, threaten to take away children, employ gang members to sort out the families of those that dared to reject the sister's threats, to sabotage family and work situations even lay false complaints with police - and all for what, to be proved wrong and to slink away after dropping Parker and Purkiss in it facing dire financial forebodings.

Saturday, October 12, 2013

Mark Lundy - what happened to him?

By one account he had a deliberate plan of murder, creating an alibi and killing his wife 'quietly' with a tomahawk, dressed as a woman and oblivious to his own daughter asleep in the house and able to hear the screams of her mother as she died. What did he do, killed his daughter because she recognised him dressed as a woman and continued on with his perfect plan. I suppose you have to think that if he so willingly killed his daughter because she woke to hear the awful slaughter of her mother, why he hadn't just killed them both from the outset instead of malingering over a fine detailed plan that required a bludgeoning and chopping to death of Christine without Amber being woken from sleep.

It's a hard picture to reconcile. Which is no doubt part of the public response to him, ridicule about his weight, his looks, his 'amateurish' acting and so forth. None of that however is proof of murder. It is proof of some in society that convince themselves of the guilt or horridness of others based on how they look - we may be able to call it the Bain 'phenomenon.' Few, 'thoughtful' on line debates about the Bain case don't contain an element of ridicule to compensate for the lack of evidence proving David guilty and his father innocent. Of course others joining in that ridicule, or supporting it, are betraying an emotion that has coloured not only their thinking but all their opinions. These will be people that have a deeply held belief upon which all their judgements are made, that belief is that Lundy or David Bain are guilty formed by impressions, antagonism, hate and so forth that advance to become shrouded in 'facts.' The very reason why some Bain detractors years after various pieces of key evidence have been disproved, or explained, repeat them ad nauseum as though they are fresh points which other people somehow don't know or understand.

Those 'beliefs' are important because they hide, at least to the mind of the individual, that their motivation is little more than hatred against what the late Harry Cohen would describe as a 'public whipping boy.' What the malevolence against David Bain and Mark Lundy displays in today's society belies that haphazardness of Justice 100s of years after the Salem witch hunts. For we have a man apparently hurling abuse as Lundy is released on bail, a person who no doubt has a core 'belief' in his guilt but who I'm sure would not have read or properly understood this week's Privy Council decision. That's at one level, another is the hate-campaigns self described as campaigns and which it seems even Ministers of the Crown become susceptible, fearing, or sensing, that it is 'public opinion' that must be heeded for political purposes - the most vocal of those being the Sensible Sentencing Trust and it's 'crossed' over membership in the Justice for Robin Bain group and its associated shadow Counterspin.

So if, as it seems, there are a flood of cases of Miscarriages of Justice on the books why is their no political leadership, no control over a whole picture that impacts on the Public? It is political forbearance or indeed is it bowing to the basest political tool of all - fear? I have written about the clear venom the current Minister of Justice betrayed against David Bain when she 'warned' that she wouldn't release the Binnie report because David may not like the contents. When the report was released there was nothing for David not to like that was not overcome by the lucid reasoning and decision that he was not guilty of his guilty his family, was in fact innocent of the balance of probabilities.

At the 'end' of all these 'attacks' that disguise hatred are in fact real people, most of whom ultimately are proven to be innocent and the victims of a corrupt state unable or unwilling to accept blame, in other words the state has become, or is seen to have become, an institution disproving of Bain or Lundy's looks, their 'acting' of 'evidence' against them which in many circumstances is either fabricated or in fact evidence of nothing at all but a fillip to ignite that shroud that is 'carefully' built to hide the black heart of hatred. The sort of hatred that insulates a tortured individual from their belief or fears about their shortcomings, looks, awkwardness, personality traits that they wish to project away onto the 'public whipping boy' in order that they themselves will not be looked at closely but seen in the ranks of those marching off to a modern day execution where words and logic are smeared with bile.

Friday, October 11, 2013

Walsh and Police support the Giles evidence?

Has been a dramatic week in the New Zealand Justice arena since Monday. It seems likely that the release of the report into the claims of gunshot residue being on the hands of the late Robin Bain was timed to coincide with the release of the Privy Council decision in another controversial case - that of Mark Lundy which I shall blog about later.

Firstly to that report. In essence ESIR scientist Walh hasn't been able to discount that Robin Bain's thumb was photographed with gsr at the murder scene. He has confirmed the method of transfer shown on the show 3 Degrees is possible, though his opinion that it was unlikely in this case. By any estimation that falls into the category of reasonable doubt that David was not the killer but rather that it was Robin Bain. Unfortunately, and I don't know the reason why, but there was no mention of the corroborating evidence of Robin being the user of the firearm that morning, also discovered by David Giles and mentioned below in other blogs along with photographs of the same. I know that information was sent to the Minister, it is strange it wasn't covered in the report released last Monday. The public need to know how Walsh has or will evaluate that evidence. It seems likely that the 'coincidences' of the marks on Robin's hands from what seems to be handling the rifle will make a conclusion that he was the killer highly probable.

As to the police response. It seems Deputy Commissioner Burgess has 'out smarted' himself. He sticks with the tried and 'true' marks from home handy man 'work.' However, he has no support for that from the police Pathologist in the case Dr Alex Dempster who has said, unequivocally, that he did not see or record the marks in the mortuary when further examining the body of Robin Bain after a preliminary examination at the scene. In fact by the time Dempster was allowed to examine the scene the gsr may have already degenerated and no longer been visible, or simply been 'wiped off' as the detectives moved the body, rifle and magazine about the scene of Robin's death. But what Burgess has 'agreed' is that at some point there were marks on Robin's thumb, hardly a concession by virtue that many in New Zealand have also now seen them. Burgess has hung his hat on the fact there were marks but they were from injuries, of course those 'injuries' were unable to be seen by Dempster in the morgue and unable to be photographed by either Dempster's staff or police. How odd that Burgess did not explain that.

It's safe to agree that the allegation of marks of gsr on Robin's hands has not gone away. It has further support because Walsh has agreed they could have transferred there from the magazine and Burgess that they were present in the morgue but are not 'revealed' in photographs. It's steady as she goes, two Crown specialists on side that there might have been gsr and to this point no apparent report on associated marks on Robin's hands likely corroborating one another.

Think of the theory's already dismissed, that the marks were wrinkles, from playing a guitar, that they didn't exist to now agreement, even from police, that they did exist but somehow disappeared to the eye and weren't revealed in morgue photographs. Photographs, many will remember that showed recent cuts, bruises and blood on the hands of Robin Bain. As I say above the gsr hasn't gone away it has come closer.

Thursday, September 26, 2013

More proof against Robin.

Well actually not proof against Robin but proof of David's innocence. For some respite in the venom that surrounds aspects of this case, it has to be remembered that Robin never set his son up for murder, it was the police that did that either inadvertently or carelessly, because of  the poor case management of Detective Inspector Peter Robinson and the oversight by Detective Sergeant Doyle at not looking at the fundamental core of this case - the hands of Robin.,

At the moment others are looking into any possible comparisons of the nicks in the white opera gloves and the injuries to Robin's hands, also the stain patterns compared to where Robin had blood wash on his hands. Perhaps for the first time, Robin's hands, as they always should have been, are the focus. The following are two photos taken from the show of the 'super sleuth' Bryan Bruce, which unfortunately reveal why he doesn't get a tin badge or even a plastic one.

Excuse the apparent horridness of these photos and others to do with the case which have been put on this blog. However, in as much as the photos are in the public forum now, they never would have been if Mark Lodge, had not only written down in his note book about the blood smears on Robin's palms, but that Peter Robinson, had scratched his head on receipt of the information realising the significance of that blood, and done what he needed to do anyway, investigate Robin's death in isolation. Remembering that puzzled look that Robinson had on his face during his cross examination at the retrial? He may have been considering, as any investigator in the world worth their salt would have done, that a 'murder' victim, shot by stealth, doesn't have blood smears on their palms. To relieve himself of any further confusion, he may inquired in all detail about injuries to Robin's hands, saving the country millions of dollars and David unbearable horror.

One has to be concerned about Robinson, ultimately he is responsible for the investigation. Did it for example never concern him that in the 2nd photo below, where there is no circle drawn around the body of Robin, that there is no magazine in sight! Then looking at the first photo and the entry wound above Robin's eye (and not in his temple - thanks Lee) why didn't Robinson see the very obvious fact that there was no link (blood trial) from that wound to Robin's right cheek where, in other photos, is seen a trace flow across the cheek. Two things on that, the blood flow from the wound is all upward, giving weight to the argument of the blood nose. Secondly if blood from the wound is going upwards, obviously by gravity, how can there be other blood reversing the laws of gravity be present, when it is not from the same wound.

Nobody should be mistaken for a second that if David Bain was found to have injuries to his hands, it would have been said they were consistent with his having been in a fight with Stephen. Similarly, had he had blood wash on his hands, red material under his nails it would have been claimed as proof of murder. Yet in the Bain case the 'suspect' with both blood on his hands and several injuries to them is 'considered' a victim. Contemplate also that if he'd had what was possibly gunshot residue seen on his thumb that 'just happened' to match the ridges of a magazine used in the killings, or a round impression of the same diameter of the hole in the side of magazine, along with an impression consistent with the base of the magazine as would be made by pushing it home into the rifle. All of these things would have been proof of murder, as would the finding of his fresh blood on a towel in the laundry, or indications of blood having been coming from his nose that morning. All of it, evidence against David, yet because this evidence was found to be connected to Robin in every sense - it means he was a victim. A big logic failure there. Are we to assume the police are so incompetent that they are not only unable to see the wood from the trees, but indeed be unable to even see the trees or the forest. There is something ticking in the Bain case and more evidence will continue to emerge against Robin, to the point that the 'mountain' of evidence once said to show David's guilt will not only have completely disappeared but be revealed to have left a mountain of evidence against the man who took the lives of his wife and children.

Footnote; I shall add a picture of the right side of Robin's face taken in the lounge later.






 
 

Friday, September 20, 2013

All that blood and gunshot residue.

As it happens, the defence team of David Bain, the police and Dr Dempster, the Crown pathologist, are all in agreement about one fact - the blood found on Robin Bain's hands. Detective Lodge recorded it first as is shown in the third video below. I'm unaware of any plausible explanation from Lodge or his commanding officer of the time, now retired Detective Inspector Peter Robinson, as to how from the finding of smeared blood on the hands of a murder suspect who had suicided, an innocent young man could emerge being convicted of his father's crimes. It defies all logic and basic policing, it is the very core of what went rotten in the investigation of the Bain killings.

I vouch for the authenticity of all that it is contained in these videos at their core base, proof of
Robin Bain as the killer of four of his family and of his suicide. I invite any of the Justice for Robin Bain, or Counterspin 'campaigners' to bring a civil action against me that can ultimately deny the key truth revealed in these videos. I also invite Robinson,  Lodge, or the most public of those that campaigned or continue to campaign against David Bain, the 'reporter' from The Press, Martin Van Beynan to sue me over the contents of these videos which I republish at my own will, because what this narrative implies, the subtext, the photos and conclusions is that they were all instrumental in one of the most, if not the most, significant Miscarriages of Justice in New Zealand history. A Miscarriage of Justice which shall echo for decades to come, against not only David, but his mother Margaret, sisters Arawa and Laniet, little brother Stephen, and his dad Robin who lost his way with no one to help him.


 


 

No scientific arguments against the thumb magazine marks.

Something of recent consistency about the Bain case has been the 'investigation' into Robin's hands. There are 3 short videos now on the internet showing how much progress has been made which I will link to separately later. Firstly however the main debate has been about the 2 'David Giles' marks discovered in a photo of Robin Bain's thumb that are argued to be gunshot residue, consistent with Robin Bain having loaded the magazine that morning. Of course there is more evidence that has emerged in the last couple of weeks that creates and environment of credibility of accepting the 2 marks as being gsr. Before answering some of the criticism of those marks I urge readers to consider that 'environment of credibility.' In doing so consider what Binnie showed us in his report - the 'stepping back' to look at an overall picture.

The 'environment' surrounding the thumb is to me conclusive of Robin's suicide and David's innocence. Look and see Robin dead on the floor, quite easy because of the number of photos available. Note the blood flow higher in close relationship to his temple, then another low across the jaw and also the blood on Robin's moustache. He had a nose bleed that morning. Consider the reason for that, knowing that he was bleeding before his death and that his blood was found as a heavy saturation on a towel in the laundry, that his hands were smeared with blood (evidence from Detective Lodge and Dr Dempster,) also that a 'red substance' was found under his nail, which, like the smeared blood was never tested. Michael Reed, when cross examining Doyle, put to Doyle that if the blood was shown to have been from Stephen or  Laniet it would have implicated Robin - Doyle agreed. However, I say the blood implicated Robin regardless of it's source - he had blood on his hands that morning that was present before his death.

That environment includes a rifle, a pattern of splatter, a magazine but it also draws us back to the hands, they were battered and bruised as well as being bloody. Now we discover that there were lines most probably gsr on the thumb and the right palm, there were skin impressions likely to have been caused by handling the magazine. In all too much to escape, the Crown agree to the blood and the cuts (despite trying to minimalize them,) many in the country have seen what are said to have been gsr marks on the thumbs. Those are disputed because of size and other arguments, what follows below is identical examples of the lines replicated as a test on another persons hands who use the magazine and they match Robins. The Crown case is lurching to the deep. Remember the environment and the stepping back, blood, cuts, bruises, marks, blood loss from the nose and fresh blood on a laundry towel and on trousers found in Robin's van, think about the upward trajectory shot, the powder burns around the forehead  wound, the spatter on the curtain, going in two directions on the trousers, the uninterrupted splatter across the floor toward the curtain and the height of the spatter on the curtain - all of this is the 'environment' of what I use to call 'the final death scene,' the place where Robin died leaving all the proof in the world of how it was done. Proof, not even considered worth testing by Robinson.

There are a couple of enduring scenes of Robinson, the first was of him walking in Every Street surrounded by his officers, a big confident man in the middle of his 'men.' In time one of those men would be off side with police after accusations that he planted evidence, but consider Robinson. He is the man that accepted that 'evidence' without hesitation - it was he that never questioned how it could have possibly been found in a situation like that in the Thomas case - from a place already searched. It was also he, as ex Detective Weir described to Binnie, who had  a 'stance' on the Bain case. It was he, Robinson, upon whose watch evidence was not tested or destroyed. The man also in charge when Laniet's electronic diary 'disappeared.' The man who never ordered Robin to be investigated when such a situation is a given in all homicide investigations. A lot was hidden under the watch of Peter Robinson bringing me to the point of mentioning the second enduring image, when he was being cross examined he had a perplex almost bewildered look on his face as though the questions put to him by Reed about what the proper course of the inquiry should have been - he came across as somewhat dumb. Of course that was an act, 'dumb' men don't get to become Detective Inspectors, but they may very well play 'dumb' when they need to do so in order to protect themselves, when a point is reached that a decision might be made about their own 'skins' compared to sending a young man to decades of imprisonment and public vilification despite being innocent.

Finally consider Karam, Reed, and Giles. None of them desperate men in anyway. Reed blunt and logical, Karam a thinker with an obstinate determination, Giles a 'looker' and questioner, none of these men have put, or would put their reputations at risk over anything they were not 100% sure. So to the fanciful and hysterical hate-siters, van beynan and the smirking Burgess - here are the lines, that 'might' have been from doing 'handiman' repairs on the roof in the middle of the night, or playing a guitar (how desperate was that one from old van derbum,) and they are conclusively, on the Balance of Probabilities (the 'enivronment' given some detail above,) gunshot residue from Robin preparing to kill himself having first killed four of his family. An argument has always been that he was driven by fear of discovery of being involved in incest, but what if simply he had become a wretched soul confused about his relationship with his own daughter, who was growing out of 'his' control of her, but who had learnt some of the secrets contained in the 'lost; diary of Laniet Bain.

The following from a contributor:

 

The colored lines are exact copies of each other

The left image –Robins thumb

The right image- a photo from the retest

Each photo also contained an image of the magazine, the photographs were resized so that the magazine dimensions were the same in each photograph.