Has been an interesting watch as more of the 'twisted sisters' have got their marching orders from the message boards of Trade Me. Nobody could say they haven't had a good run in spreading their lies in order to generate hate against Bain, Binnie, Karam and others. The real point is that they should never have had the opportunity. Opinion is one thing, but when opinion is argued using lies then the intention is not to express a view, but rather to convince others using lies. All those lies have a person at the other end, in this case ultimately David Bain. It isn't opinion that David wasn't stripped search, it's actually a lie intended to show that David killed his family because he had 'fresh' injuries, but it goes further because it therefore states that Karam knows the 'truth' that David had scratches on his chest on the morning of the murders. So the circle has played out for a long time. Jeeves-50 has continued that for years, saying the same thing over and over again despite all the evidence to the contrary. Nobody can be that dumb, it's all intentional to say David was the killer and therefore Karam, Reed, and Binnie all know, and are liars and manipulators of the truth.
That is more than lies, it's clear defamation intending to damage the life and reputations of those Jeeves and his twisted sisters have targeted. I wrote about these less than subtle intentions to Trade Me years ago, and whether or not the hate site message is finally breached by the recent banning's, the message seems to finally be getting through. It's an appropriate time to the step back to look at the intentions, Ralph Taylor (Jeeves-50) has lied about the Bain case for years, in doing so he's been defamatory of others Yet it's the bigger picture of the individual lies of he, and others like 'cookingwithgas' and 'therafter,' as to what their intentions are - those intentions are becoming clearer. They've lied and lied to ensure that people hate David, Joe Karam, in order to protect Robin Bain. Although in fact they've done a great disservice to Robin Bain, because they've keep alive his name years after it should have moved into the past - they've ensured that others such as David Giles have continued to 'look.'
Now, we see that 'looking' has provided evidence that Robin Bain's hands were in fact bloodied and bruised, consistent with him killing his family. That is clear, so is the fact that there were no injuries to David's chest on the morning his family were killed but there was blood, smeared blood and gunshot residue on the hands of his father. Those hands are the key to the case, the key to why the sisters have needed to lie. With that truth revealed, the public have a right to know about the significance of the 'white opera' gloves Robin chose to wear. Learn the answer as to why Detective Inspector Peter Robinson retired early, the opportunity to reflect upon what may have driven Robin to have felt angry and embarrassed enough, not only by the allegations of incest against him, but if he may have learnt that other 'fellows,' who understood the wearing of white gloves, had taken advantage of Laniet Bain in a way that made life impossible to face for Robin. The public need to know that, also whether those such as Ralph Taylor have been striving to cover up something more than the guilt of Robin Bain.
Thursday, September 19, 2013
Tuesday, September 17, 2013
What the sisters don't want to see....
A clearer image of the magazine showing the curve that matches that on Robin's thumb. Some of the sisters were being naughty and spitting out their false teeth saying a photo linked a couple blogs below wasn't high resolution enough.
Well check this one out 'girls,' this should be right up your alley, in a metaphorical sense of course - just in case you thought you finally got lucky. It's so sad that all those potions and floppy tits (and that just the blokes) have made it seem necessary that old van beynan, the world expert, who sat through nearly every minute of the trial on a potty, will finally apologise for that which he never reported to the public.
Well check this one out 'girls,' this should be right up your alley, in a metaphorical sense of course - just in case you thought you finally got lucky. It's so sad that all those potions and floppy tits (and that just the blokes) have made it seem necessary that old van beynan, the world expert, who sat through nearly every minute of the trial on a potty, will finally apologise for that which he never reported to the public.
Wednesday, September 11, 2013
What the Minister and Police will need to consider in their next report.
Further Bain evidence that the Police and Minister need to be mindful of when considering the two lines shown on Robin Bain's thumb in a photo taken before his body was removed from the scene.
The ‘not quite’ parallel lines …
The
parallel lines of course stick out like… well like a sore thumb. There are
going to be forensic reports from both the DB camp & the police on these
lines, so I don’t think I need to add anything further, except to clarify
something- the lines are not parallel. The magazine is
warped, therefore the thumb lines are similarly warped. I’m sure the police
forensics report will pick up on this basic fact.
The warping is the main cause of the rifle misfiring thus
it certainly made Stephens death particularly gruesome.
Is there more ?….
So aside from the almost parallel lines, what else can we
see in Robin’s hand? A fair bit as it turns out.
Firstly let’s look at that dark smudge in the meaty part of
his palm. Most crime scene investigation manuals will tell you to be on the lookout
for dark smudges on the hands of the victim/suicidee. When I showed this to
somebody else they wondered if this wasn’t just lividity, but this patch stands
out from the other blotchiness on Robin’s hand. It also contains an interesting
round white patch and a distinct line. Can you see it? I’ve left a clue
in the picture of the magazine if you haven’t quite spotted it yet.
Then there is this residual staining on another part of his palm.
It looks remarkably like very dilute blood.
Magazine Insertion Marks?
No doubt the passionate supporters of Robin will be scoffing
at the above smudges and staining. Fair
enough, but there is a construction taking part here, with elements supporting one another in the overall context.
Consider other possible actions associated
with handling the magazine. What about inserting the magazine into the firearm itself?
Would that leave any marks?
Take a look at these screenshots from the TV3 program.
The first photo show the person’s right hand inserting the
magazine into the rifle.
Note Well #1
His thumb appears to be covering the hole in the side of the
magazine. Thus perhaps we might expect to see a circular mark on Robin’s thumb
that matches the diameter of the hole in the side of the magazine.
Yes they’re there alright, faint but distinct. See 2 little circles overlapping
slightly. According to my measurements
they exactly match the little hole on the side of the magazine, but for
any sceptics out there, please fiddle with the pictures yourself: let me
know if you think I have screwed this up. Remembering of course the overall picture in which these issues are linked, considering it, if you will, as a circumstantial chain of evidence showing who loaded and fired the rifle that morning.
Note Well # 2
The person inserting the magazine into the firearm uses the
palm of his hand to push up against the bottom of the magazine. It’s highly
likely that much of the upward force would be applied through the bottom back corners
of the magazine. Thus perhaps we might expect to see some marks in Robin’s palm
that match the width of the bottom of the magazine. This dimension is different
from the parallel lips at the top of the magazine.
So taking another look at Robins palm… 2 marks that exactly match the width of the bottom of the magazine.
Conclusion:
The photo contains 3 distinct marks each appears to be associated with a
different handling action on the magazine.
1)
The almost-parallel lines on Robin’s thumb appear to
exactly match the loading lips of the magazine. If confirmed then it is fair to assume
Robin loaded bullets into the magazine.
2)
Two small overlapping circles appear to exactly match the
hole diameter on the side of the magazine. If this is confirmed it is reasonable to assume that Robin
had his thumb compressed against this hole as he inserted the magazine into the
rifle.
3)
A pair of marks in Robins palm appear to exactly match the
bottom width of the magazine. If confirmed it is reasonable to assume that these marks were made by Robin pushing his
palm up against the bottom rear corners of the magazine as he inserted it into
the rifle.
.
In addition to these marks, the photograph shows dark
smudging that could be associated with powder residue; there is also staining that appears
consistent with residual dilute blood. It is possible that Robin rinsed blood
off his hands probably with cold water sometime that morning. (Note here other previously distributed photos which have shown blood wash on Robin's palms, and remember the blood soaked towel in the laundry with Robin's blood on it.)
The fact that there are 3 distinct marking patterns, each
appearing to match different parts of the magazine; each associated with different
actions, make it important that the photograph of Robin Bain's hands is fully analysed by forensic experts.
(Editor's Final Note: David Giles says 'overwhelmingly certain.' Readers here are invited to consider that the case against David Bain is gone, that it in fact never existed. From a particular point in the future {soon I imagine} all legal proceedings in which David Bain is involved in any way shape or form will be on the basis of his complete innocence, there will no longer be room for arguments of 'not guilty' but not innocent - a travesty is in the process of being destroyed and from which much must be learned.)
Tuesday, September 10, 2013
The 'over weight' of evidence against Robin Bain.
Trying to get 'rid of' those marks on Robin's thumb, the Gunshot residue? Interestingly the twisted sisters claim that either the marks are not there or that they would have been wiped off when Robin shot himself, had that been the case. That's cake and eat it too territory, no wonder the dimwits want to talk about anything other than the forensic evidence - they are crapping themselves, rather angrily at that. I expect hating somebody for a long time has become addictive for many of the dear sisters and when considering the options, horrid as it must seem for them of who to hate next, they realise they, themselves, are prime candidates. I can only encourage them to go right on ahead and hate themselves because there is plenty of reasons to beyond those marks, and evidence which keeps being discovered - it's pretty hateful to persecute an innocent man for nearly 2 decades and to attack anyone who doesn't join the lynch squad. It's also hateful to stalk families, interfere with people's lives and that of their children because they won't be 'right thinking' and absorbed by hate-lust.
Check this out, the thumb not in contact with the rifle. Time also to reflect on the difficulty of prints transferring to firearms, the figure being in the 90% range of being negative. Think about a finger print, think about the times fingertips would come into contact with a rifle when using it. There is no doubt Robin Bains fingerprints were on the rifle, among those that couldn't clearly be distinguished and which were destroyed preventing the opportunity to have prints 'excluded' as having come from Robin Bain - the technology for which is available. For everything the police destroyed by way of evidence, the case against Robin Bain remained strong, and still becomes stronger by the day. How do I know his fingerprints were on the rifle, because he loaded the magazine and shot himself, after first killing his family. Robin Bain has found his place in infamy now, along with 'reporters' like Van Beynan, finger print 'experts' like Jones and 'I forgot' evidence hiders like Weir and for a marriage of the wicked throw in Guest and some Appeal Court Judges whose blindness was only overwhelmed by malice and stupidity in respect of the cause they serve - Justice. It never fitted folks, it never fitted, 100s of pages of Judgements full of excuses never helped because the truth escaped. Long live the truth.
Check this out, the thumb not in contact with the rifle. Time also to reflect on the difficulty of prints transferring to firearms, the figure being in the 90% range of being negative. Think about a finger print, think about the times fingertips would come into contact with a rifle when using it. There is no doubt Robin Bains fingerprints were on the rifle, among those that couldn't clearly be distinguished and which were destroyed preventing the opportunity to have prints 'excluded' as having come from Robin Bain - the technology for which is available. For everything the police destroyed by way of evidence, the case against Robin Bain remained strong, and still becomes stronger by the day. How do I know his fingerprints were on the rifle, because he loaded the magazine and shot himself, after first killing his family. Robin Bain has found his place in infamy now, along with 'reporters' like Van Beynan, finger print 'experts' like Jones and 'I forgot' evidence hiders like Weir and for a marriage of the wicked throw in Guest and some Appeal Court Judges whose blindness was only overwhelmed by malice and stupidity in respect of the cause they serve - Justice. It never fitted folks, it never fitted, 100s of pages of Judgements full of excuses never helped because the truth escaped. Long live the truth.
Monday, September 9, 2013
More proof of innocence.
The following are not new.
The first, rather ironically, is the photo of the murder-suicide rifle belonging to David, with perhaps the exhibit number, 14, and the name R Bain. Either a mishap or prophetic.
The second, is another of the magazine, showing very clearly, the certainty of the marks on Robin's thumbs having been raised from that surface of the magazine chamber by the 'footprint' or 'reprint' of the misshapen chamber narrower at one end than the other - shown below in reverse. Using all the desperate imagination in the world, marks from guttering, from playing a guitar (the fantasy of Van Beynan I understand, now struggling to legitimise his hate campaign) rendered to nonsense. This leaves the Minister and police with no where to go that can have any credibility, it denounces foot 'measurements' that relied on the measuring of socks, computer turn on times calculated by the use of a fixed point and an unknown, a paperboy delivering papers as an 'alibi' and needing to be 'seen' in case some moron wouldn't believe the papers themselves weren't proof of his having done the paper round, or the lens of broken glasses of no use David Bain being 'found' days after initial searches, of a 'strip search' that needs a different name because it was illegal but which found no injuries on David Bain consistent with a fight with his brother or the slaying of his family. All of this would could now be said to have been Robin, tormented and lost soul, giving the thumbs up to his own guilt. More fittingly it could have perhaps been a forefinger raised to the head of the Dunedin police, Robinson, the man who 'oversaw' the framing of David Cullen Bain, or Jones the fingerprint expert who admitted to lying to the Jury to help them understand the evidence 'clearly' - the man confused about the colours white and black, confused also about how fingerprints miraculously sharpen rather than flatten under pressure. A finger to Doyle also for not investigating the crimes against Laniet Bain, who turned a 'blind eye' to them because he had 'a murder to solve,' one which didn't require all the suspects being eliminated, but rather the chosen one framed. Let's also consider the finger might have been raised to Robin's own family who would see his house burnt down, his son imprisoned on the strength of things that were only remembered 'later' when the Crown case was in trouble and when Robinson just wanted to 'retire' and run. So much told of the truth that was hidden in those two lines. The remains of a railway track that resulted in a train crash because the lines were not parallel, moved by some 'natural' event such as a earthquake, or an 'unnatural' event members of a police force covering for each other, perhaps covering for the 'boss.' A finger for a diary lost, for doors shut firmly closed because of what might be found to destroy a marriage or a career. It may have been Robin that flipped out that morning, but he wasn't the only one.
And so to the third photo, a demonstration taken from the court, showing (as it is now) that Robin's thumb need never have come into contact with another surface or 'rub' before he shot himself and when that photo of the two 'lines' was taken.
And for all of this we need an International Jurist attacked by inferior 'peers' working at the behest of a 'neutral' master, Judicial Reviews to determine what due process, fairness and a Prerogative Power of Mercy is, for a 'neutral' reporter to stalk Karam and Bain, even overseas. That person of course being 'Probably' Van Beynan, assassin of Peter Ellis, Jury stalker and the man who sat through 'almost every minute of the retrial' but who never told the country about the strip search of David Bain which revealed no injuries to his chest, nor about the blood and DNA of Robin Bain vacuumed into the rifle pictured above, with his name upon it. Who pays Van Beynan now?
The first, rather ironically, is the photo of the murder-suicide rifle belonging to David, with perhaps the exhibit number, 14, and the name R Bain. Either a mishap or prophetic.
The second, is another of the magazine, showing very clearly, the certainty of the marks on Robin's thumbs having been raised from that surface of the magazine chamber by the 'footprint' or 'reprint' of the misshapen chamber narrower at one end than the other - shown below in reverse. Using all the desperate imagination in the world, marks from guttering, from playing a guitar (the fantasy of Van Beynan I understand, now struggling to legitimise his hate campaign) rendered to nonsense. This leaves the Minister and police with no where to go that can have any credibility, it denounces foot 'measurements' that relied on the measuring of socks, computer turn on times calculated by the use of a fixed point and an unknown, a paperboy delivering papers as an 'alibi' and needing to be 'seen' in case some moron wouldn't believe the papers themselves weren't proof of his having done the paper round, or the lens of broken glasses of no use David Bain being 'found' days after initial searches, of a 'strip search' that needs a different name because it was illegal but which found no injuries on David Bain consistent with a fight with his brother or the slaying of his family. All of this would could now be said to have been Robin, tormented and lost soul, giving the thumbs up to his own guilt. More fittingly it could have perhaps been a forefinger raised to the head of the Dunedin police, Robinson, the man who 'oversaw' the framing of David Cullen Bain, or Jones the fingerprint expert who admitted to lying to the Jury to help them understand the evidence 'clearly' - the man confused about the colours white and black, confused also about how fingerprints miraculously sharpen rather than flatten under pressure. A finger to Doyle also for not investigating the crimes against Laniet Bain, who turned a 'blind eye' to them because he had 'a murder to solve,' one which didn't require all the suspects being eliminated, but rather the chosen one framed. Let's also consider the finger might have been raised to Robin's own family who would see his house burnt down, his son imprisoned on the strength of things that were only remembered 'later' when the Crown case was in trouble and when Robinson just wanted to 'retire' and run. So much told of the truth that was hidden in those two lines. The remains of a railway track that resulted in a train crash because the lines were not parallel, moved by some 'natural' event such as a earthquake, or an 'unnatural' event members of a police force covering for each other, perhaps covering for the 'boss.' A finger for a diary lost, for doors shut firmly closed because of what might be found to destroy a marriage or a career. It may have been Robin that flipped out that morning, but he wasn't the only one.
And so to the third photo, a demonstration taken from the court, showing (as it is now) that Robin's thumb need never have come into contact with another surface or 'rub' before he shot himself and when that photo of the two 'lines' was taken.
And for all of this we need an International Jurist attacked by inferior 'peers' working at the behest of a 'neutral' master, Judicial Reviews to determine what due process, fairness and a Prerogative Power of Mercy is, for a 'neutral' reporter to stalk Karam and Bain, even overseas. That person of course being 'Probably' Van Beynan, assassin of Peter Ellis, Jury stalker and the man who sat through 'almost every minute of the retrial' but who never told the country about the strip search of David Bain which revealed no injuries to his chest, nor about the blood and DNA of Robin Bain vacuumed into the rifle pictured above, with his name upon it. Who pays Van Beynan now?
Thursday, September 5, 2013
David Bain to appeal non release of secret documents.
In possibly a surprise move David Bain is set to appeal a decision by the Auckland High Court not to order the release of 250 documents or so in the hands of the Minister of Justice. This is against a background that DB is in the process of a Judicial Review alleging that that Minister, Judith Collins, denied the basics of Law, due process, natural Law and that she effectively 'acted' against the application rather that acted upon information forwarded to her, or in other words that she displayed bias.
In the High Court decision the Judge said that DB's counsel may well already have proof of their contention of bias in documents discovered to them. That observation is important to the Bain term because it apparently satisfies the allegation that the Minister was not only 'not' neutral, but actively biased. It's hard to disagree with that view. The Judge hearing the application read the documentation and made a decision that it wasn't helpful to the Lawyers of Bain. That may have been a key, on the one hand the Judge observed the 'openness' of Justice and satisfied herself that the with held papers either weren't of material evidence, or that released documents already (as she referred) satisfied the contention of bias being demonstrated. One can imagine that it is great that 'door' was opened and investigated by the Judge, although on the other hand the Judge put herself in a position of 'secret' judgment excluding counsel and the applicant,
That issue of 'secrecy' has a long life in the Bain case, it is part of the reason why the Privy Council ruled in 2007 that an 'actual Miscarriage of Justice' had taken place, by virtue of, among other things, material being kept secret against the principles and precedents of fairness. The 'shame' for those interested in 'open Justice' is that the High Court ruling has an element of secrecy where one side don't know the information of the other yet for purposes the information is part of the mechanism that robbed Bain of his freedom and which by turn has been used in an attempt to deny him compensation.
The Minister has argued that the information was privileged. On the surface that is a traditional and acceptable argument in most circumstances in an adversarial law suit. However, there the big problem for the Minister arrives, hers in not an adversarial role, her role is to consider and prepare an recommendation for the Executive. In this case the recommendation was made by retired Justice Ian Binnie, however the Minister has demonstrably acted against the advice, finally rejecting it publicly when it emerged that she had secretly (yes that word again) been working against Binnie's report and by proxy against the applicant David Bain.
The Minister may believe she has 'king like' powers, but she clearly misses that they are to operate with compassion and mercy for individuals who may be wrongly imprisoned or suffering loss associated with such. In all they (the discretionary powers) must demonstrate that the gap in our Legislation that should have afforded compulsory compensation for false imprisonment is filled by a discretionary power said by it's 'designers' as capable of covering that missing Legislation, and of course in accordance (even if it is not spelt out) with all the rules of Justice and Law. Secrecy is not one of those, nor of course is bias.
Having thought about the said decision to appeal I've been interested in what the grounds might be. If in fact there is an argument that every thing put before, or solicited by the Minister in her preparations to Cabinet should be available to the applicant then I agree. It's 'secrecy' that served as a MOJ to David Bain and to see a Minister, deigned to act with both impartiality and mercy, continue the secrecy is to me a further travesty of Justice. David Bain is not going to be hurt by knowing what is in those papers, but convincingly he will be hurt by not knowing. Who stands to lose? Why the Minister of course, because she hasn't been diligent and fair to her task, she has leant one way to look at documents from one 'party' and not to disclosed them to the 'other.' The Minister's role appears to have become one of 'protecting' one of the parties from information from the other - sounds good at first but what is the victim of a MOJ being protected from this time, and why is it imperative that he is not allowed to know.
On another level, The Minister, being foremost a politician, even when wearing her temporary Crown, has other hurdles in front of her. Foremost is the discovery of David Giles of what looks certainly to be gun shot residue on the hands of Robin Bain consistent with him having loaded and fired the rifle the morning his wife and 3 of his children were killed. He plainly wasn't the 'victim' that the Crown have portrayed for nearly 20 years, he was the killer that left 4 victims dead and a son who would be soon victimised for 2 decades of trying to prove him guilty of crimes he didn't commit. Assuming the Minister has one eye on the future she has gone down a track that may prove perilous on many known grounds. When she first 'began' she didn't know about the 'Giles' discovery, one which I would presume may have tempered her bias has she known, because ultimately it reflects upon her. She is the person who has acted against David Bain because of a report she didn't like which declared him factually innocent, she thought otherwise, or at least her intimate 'advisors' did those whose advice she chooses to keep secret as though she has 'descended into the arena' to quote her own words. However, what she doesn't know, but has presumed, is that there is no more evidence such as that discovered by David Giles. A prudent, let alone unbiased person would consider that there would be at least some on going search taken up where the gsr evidence leads off, it is clearly fertile ground now - having removed a 'major' uncertainty that had it been known, properly discovered and noted that David would never have been charged. He might have still be subjected to the intrusive strip search, but possibly no more than that had police been willing to listen to their own pathologist.
The 'knowns' in the Bain case continue to stack up against Robin Bain, not that they all may have ever been hidden deliberately but continue to emerge they nevertheless do. The first of those must be secrecy, that the current Minister has continued that is about to be tested in Court, what ever the result, the known that Robin had battered and bloody hands with fresh wounds when he shot himself is now added to by the fact of the high probability that he had gsr on his thumb and elsewhere on his hands, while other 'knowns' are sure to follow to confront the 'secrecy' of Judith Collins.
In the High Court decision the Judge said that DB's counsel may well already have proof of their contention of bias in documents discovered to them. That observation is important to the Bain term because it apparently satisfies the allegation that the Minister was not only 'not' neutral, but actively biased. It's hard to disagree with that view. The Judge hearing the application read the documentation and made a decision that it wasn't helpful to the Lawyers of Bain. That may have been a key, on the one hand the Judge observed the 'openness' of Justice and satisfied herself that the with held papers either weren't of material evidence, or that released documents already (as she referred) satisfied the contention of bias being demonstrated. One can imagine that it is great that 'door' was opened and investigated by the Judge, although on the other hand the Judge put herself in a position of 'secret' judgment excluding counsel and the applicant,
That issue of 'secrecy' has a long life in the Bain case, it is part of the reason why the Privy Council ruled in 2007 that an 'actual Miscarriage of Justice' had taken place, by virtue of, among other things, material being kept secret against the principles and precedents of fairness. The 'shame' for those interested in 'open Justice' is that the High Court ruling has an element of secrecy where one side don't know the information of the other yet for purposes the information is part of the mechanism that robbed Bain of his freedom and which by turn has been used in an attempt to deny him compensation.
The Minister has argued that the information was privileged. On the surface that is a traditional and acceptable argument in most circumstances in an adversarial law suit. However, there the big problem for the Minister arrives, hers in not an adversarial role, her role is to consider and prepare an recommendation for the Executive. In this case the recommendation was made by retired Justice Ian Binnie, however the Minister has demonstrably acted against the advice, finally rejecting it publicly when it emerged that she had secretly (yes that word again) been working against Binnie's report and by proxy against the applicant David Bain.
The Minister may believe she has 'king like' powers, but she clearly misses that they are to operate with compassion and mercy for individuals who may be wrongly imprisoned or suffering loss associated with such. In all they (the discretionary powers) must demonstrate that the gap in our Legislation that should have afforded compulsory compensation for false imprisonment is filled by a discretionary power said by it's 'designers' as capable of covering that missing Legislation, and of course in accordance (even if it is not spelt out) with all the rules of Justice and Law. Secrecy is not one of those, nor of course is bias.
Having thought about the said decision to appeal I've been interested in what the grounds might be. If in fact there is an argument that every thing put before, or solicited by the Minister in her preparations to Cabinet should be available to the applicant then I agree. It's 'secrecy' that served as a MOJ to David Bain and to see a Minister, deigned to act with both impartiality and mercy, continue the secrecy is to me a further travesty of Justice. David Bain is not going to be hurt by knowing what is in those papers, but convincingly he will be hurt by not knowing. Who stands to lose? Why the Minister of course, because she hasn't been diligent and fair to her task, she has leant one way to look at documents from one 'party' and not to disclosed them to the 'other.' The Minister's role appears to have become one of 'protecting' one of the parties from information from the other - sounds good at first but what is the victim of a MOJ being protected from this time, and why is it imperative that he is not allowed to know.
On another level, The Minister, being foremost a politician, even when wearing her temporary Crown, has other hurdles in front of her. Foremost is the discovery of David Giles of what looks certainly to be gun shot residue on the hands of Robin Bain consistent with him having loaded and fired the rifle the morning his wife and 3 of his children were killed. He plainly wasn't the 'victim' that the Crown have portrayed for nearly 20 years, he was the killer that left 4 victims dead and a son who would be soon victimised for 2 decades of trying to prove him guilty of crimes he didn't commit. Assuming the Minister has one eye on the future she has gone down a track that may prove perilous on many known grounds. When she first 'began' she didn't know about the 'Giles' discovery, one which I would presume may have tempered her bias has she known, because ultimately it reflects upon her. She is the person who has acted against David Bain because of a report she didn't like which declared him factually innocent, she thought otherwise, or at least her intimate 'advisors' did those whose advice she chooses to keep secret as though she has 'descended into the arena' to quote her own words. However, what she doesn't know, but has presumed, is that there is no more evidence such as that discovered by David Giles. A prudent, let alone unbiased person would consider that there would be at least some on going search taken up where the gsr evidence leads off, it is clearly fertile ground now - having removed a 'major' uncertainty that had it been known, properly discovered and noted that David would never have been charged. He might have still be subjected to the intrusive strip search, but possibly no more than that had police been willing to listen to their own pathologist.
The 'knowns' in the Bain case continue to stack up against Robin Bain, not that they all may have ever been hidden deliberately but continue to emerge they nevertheless do. The first of those must be secrecy, that the current Minister has continued that is about to be tested in Court, what ever the result, the known that Robin had battered and bloody hands with fresh wounds when he shot himself is now added to by the fact of the high probability that he had gsr on his thumb and elsewhere on his hands, while other 'knowns' are sure to follow to confront the 'secrecy' of Judith Collins.
Friday, August 30, 2013
Robin loaded the rifle that was used in his death.
I wonder how the sisters will twist this one. I think the Minister will be wishing she didn't have Mr Fisher's phone number on speed dial.
With today's press release confirming the unsurprising news that Dr Dempster the Crown Pathologist in the Bain case has revealed that there were no marks by way of cuts or scratches on the thumb of Robin Bain which might explain the photograph taken on the morning of the murder suicides there must be much consternation in the camp of the hate-siters. Publicly some of them are trying to disregard the significance of what the police Deputy Commissioner Burgess told the public that they might have been scratches resulting from home 'handyman' repairs is utterly wrong.
When Burgess made that statement, smug at it seemed to be, it was difficult not to think that he was perhaps amused by what he was saying - even testing the waters of public gullibility. Whichever the case those that 'needed' to believe went hook, line, sinker, boat and car trailer for it. There was an awful lot of swallowing happening among Kent's people - well more than usual. Fairly easy prediction that Mr Dempster had thoroughly done his job, a man with years of experience, concerned with recording every detail that might be later used by the Coroner or else where. A man doing his job.
It has always struck a note of discord for some followers of the Bain case as to why Dempster was refused entry to the house for hours while a train load of inexperienced elephants tramped through. I've written before of the dismay of learning that probably the most experienced investigator into homicide or suicide in Dunedin at the time was kept from the scene while others walked through, unmindful of blood or moving things about. In fact during the trial we heard of the magazine in the lounge being moved about, the body moved and so on. How easy was it for two fine marks to be accidentally erased, very easy. How easy was it to in fact miss them, well a whole country did as the photo emerged into the public domain. At least for many years it was missed by experienced investigators, scientists, pathologists and lawyers alike.
Unfortunately, apart from the Compensation Claim by David Bain, and possibly the on going inquiry as to how Royal Prerogative Powers have 'stepped' outside the rules of Natural Justice and Due process, this fact of Dempster not having had the opportunity to 'solve' the murder-suicide before amateurs entered the scene is water under the bridge to all but the hate-siters and heavy investors into David's 'guilt' and persecution. Yet it is of National significance - it was where things went wrong in a case that has dominated interest for years.
I noted in the panicked voices that it was said that the marks on Robin's thumbs were not parallel. That didn't surprise me because of the nature of the human body, skin moving under pressure and so forth. The very reason that the finger print expert Jones gave the most blatantly corrupt evidence of all when he claimed that finger print ridges were heightened under pressure rather than flattened and distorted. But I freely admit that I didn't know there might be a more significant reason for the apparent 'lack' of uniformity between the two lines - or not being parallel as some sisters chortled - that the magazine itself on the surfaces of the loading chamber were not parallel, either because of wear or some accident. In fact distorted to the point of perhaps being responsible for many of the mis-feeds viewers saw on the 3 Degrees Show and of which evidence was found at Every Street.
Here follow two photos (in the following post) that show the two lines on Robin's thumb were unique to his loading a particular magazine - the one he used to load the rifle with which he killed himself. They are as significant as anything else in the Bain case because the lines don't compare with any magazine but the particular one Robin loaded before his death.
With today's press release confirming the unsurprising news that Dr Dempster the Crown Pathologist in the Bain case has revealed that there were no marks by way of cuts or scratches on the thumb of Robin Bain which might explain the photograph taken on the morning of the murder suicides there must be much consternation in the camp of the hate-siters. Publicly some of them are trying to disregard the significance of what the police Deputy Commissioner Burgess told the public that they might have been scratches resulting from home 'handyman' repairs is utterly wrong.
When Burgess made that statement, smug at it seemed to be, it was difficult not to think that he was perhaps amused by what he was saying - even testing the waters of public gullibility. Whichever the case those that 'needed' to believe went hook, line, sinker, boat and car trailer for it. There was an awful lot of swallowing happening among Kent's people - well more than usual. Fairly easy prediction that Mr Dempster had thoroughly done his job, a man with years of experience, concerned with recording every detail that might be later used by the Coroner or else where. A man doing his job.
It has always struck a note of discord for some followers of the Bain case as to why Dempster was refused entry to the house for hours while a train load of inexperienced elephants tramped through. I've written before of the dismay of learning that probably the most experienced investigator into homicide or suicide in Dunedin at the time was kept from the scene while others walked through, unmindful of blood or moving things about. In fact during the trial we heard of the magazine in the lounge being moved about, the body moved and so on. How easy was it for two fine marks to be accidentally erased, very easy. How easy was it to in fact miss them, well a whole country did as the photo emerged into the public domain. At least for many years it was missed by experienced investigators, scientists, pathologists and lawyers alike.
Unfortunately, apart from the Compensation Claim by David Bain, and possibly the on going inquiry as to how Royal Prerogative Powers have 'stepped' outside the rules of Natural Justice and Due process, this fact of Dempster not having had the opportunity to 'solve' the murder-suicide before amateurs entered the scene is water under the bridge to all but the hate-siters and heavy investors into David's 'guilt' and persecution. Yet it is of National significance - it was where things went wrong in a case that has dominated interest for years.
I noted in the panicked voices that it was said that the marks on Robin's thumbs were not parallel. That didn't surprise me because of the nature of the human body, skin moving under pressure and so forth. The very reason that the finger print expert Jones gave the most blatantly corrupt evidence of all when he claimed that finger print ridges were heightened under pressure rather than flattened and distorted. But I freely admit that I didn't know there might be a more significant reason for the apparent 'lack' of uniformity between the two lines - or not being parallel as some sisters chortled - that the magazine itself on the surfaces of the loading chamber were not parallel, either because of wear or some accident. In fact distorted to the point of perhaps being responsible for many of the mis-feeds viewers saw on the 3 Degrees Show and of which evidence was found at Every Street.
Here follow two photos (in the following post) that show the two lines on Robin's thumb were unique to his loading a particular magazine - the one he used to load the rifle with which he killed himself. They are as significant as anything else in the Bain case because the lines don't compare with any magazine but the particular one Robin loaded before his death.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)