Give David Bain Nothing, Ctd

I was listening to talkback this morning and reading various?media?who all seem to be framing the review of the Binnie report as an unnecessary cost…and that by the time all the reviews are complete it will add up to more than if we as taxpayers gave David Bain.

That is a bizarre situation to even contemplate…paying out Bain…on the basis of what is reportedly a highly flawed report…all?because?the reviews might cost more.

I listened to Binnie’s whiny interview on Hosking’s show this morning and it strikes me that this guy is more one eyed than Joe Karam when it comes to Bain. By even commenting he has shown just how?flawed?the report may be…that he is?prepared?to enter public debate over it.

David Farrar blogs some comments he has received which make a whole lot sense than the comments of Binnie.

Binnies statement, reproduced above, is the best evidence so far supporting Judith Collins stance. In it, he quite clearly demonstrates a lack of understanding of the law and the facts.

In paragraph 4 he states that the decision of the Privy Council that there had been a miscarriage of justice was reinforced by the verdict in the 2009 retrial. I am astounded that he would make such a statement.

The acquittal did not reinforce the conclusion of the Privy Council. The Privy Council was at pains to say that it did not have an opinion as to whether Bain was guilty or not. In NZ, the term miscarriage of justice refers to the process, not the outcome. You can have a trial which is found to have been a miscarriage of justice, but which still reaches the right result.

Binnie has demonstrated in his statement that he does not understand the meaning of the term miscarriage of justice, nor doe he understand the PC decision. He has also demonstrated a failure to understand the 2009 jury?s verdict. His statement quite clearly demonstrates a belief that the not guilty verdict equates to a finding of innocence.

Then in paragraph 5 he states that ?all of the ?external? judges who have looked at the record of the case have rejected the arguments of the Solicitor General and the Crown Law Office regarding David Bain?s guilt?. Again a mistake that goes to the very heart of his integrity.

The PC made no judgement on David Bain?s guilt. Their judgement states ?In closing, the Board wishes to emphasise, as it hopes is clear, that its decision imports no view whatever on the proper outcome of a retrial?

Collins doesn?t have to release the report now. Binnie, by his own statements, has vindicated everything she has said about the report.

So it seems in his statement about his report he even erred there. Sounds like Judith Collins is going about the review the right way.

Lord knows why Simon Power even appointed Binnie. Claims from some media that Binnie was impartial seem to have been overtaken by the retired judge’s own interventions in the review process showing he was far from impartial.