Not one cent Amy, not one cent

David Bain is continuing on with his spurious claim for compensation…aided of course by his pal Joe Karam.

David Bain’s bid for compensation has moved a step forward with the Justice Minister confirming Cabinet will resume consideration of his claim.

Mr Bain’s legal team last month held confidential discussions with Justice Minister Amy Adams over his compensation bid.

Ms Adams today confirmed judicial review proceedings had been discontinued following an agreement between the two parties.

“With the matter resolved, Cabinet can now resume its consideration of Mr Bain’s claim for compensation for wrongful conviction and imprisonment,” Ms Adams said.

Cabinet agreed in February 2013, at Mr Bain’s request, that consideration of his application for compensation would be put on hold, pending determination of the judicial review proceedings he filed.

Those judicial review proceedings have been discontinued by Mr Bain, Ms Adams said.

“This discontinuance does not resolve Mr Bain’s underlying compensation claim, just the separate judicial review process. I plan to discuss next steps with my Cabinet colleagues over the coming weeks,” she said.

“While the details of the agreement are confidential, I can confirm that there was no contribution made towards Mr Bain’s compensation claim as part of this discontinuance.”

Ms Adams said there would be a further announcement regarding the consideration of the application in due course.

Joe Karam who is one to sue people for saying things about him should watch his p’s and q’s defaming Judith Collins with his statement to media.

An independent report into his case by retired Canadian judge Justice Ian Binnie ruled Mr Bain was innocent “on the balance of probabilities”, and ordered him to be paid compensation for spending more than a decade in prison.

However, this was questioned by then Justice Minister Judith Collins. She ordered a review of the report by former High Court Judge Robert Fisher, who concluded it “would be unsafe to act upon the Binnie report”.

In January 2013, Mr Bain filed for a judicial review of Ms Collins’ decision.

Long-time Bain supporter Joe Karam said the judicial review was dropped after Ms Collins was replaced.

“The whole purpose of the judicial review was to stop Collins from carrying on with her secret process,” he said today.

“When she was forced to come into the open in December 2012, it became very apparent that David Bain’s compensation claim was effectively being scuttled by her. And when so when she effectively got the sack for other reasons, there wasn’t much benefit in carrying on with the proceedings.”

What a scurrilous smear. Joe Karam should shut up, he has done more than enough harm to the justice system with his crusade and retrospective smearing of dead people.

Amy Adams and cabinet should recommend no compensation be paid. Bain was not wrongly imprisoned…he was found guilty in a court of law…he subsequently appealed and won a re-trial in strange circumstances and was then found not guilty after refusing to give evidence in the second trial. That doesn’t mean he was wrongly convicted in the first place.

Why is it that David Bain refuses to give interviews and speak about the case and why is it only the voice of Joe Karam that is heard?

Bain should get nothing. Joe Karam has had more than enough to drink from the public trough in this case.


– NZ Herald


THANK YOU for being a subscriber. Because of you Whaleoil is going from strength to strength. It is a little known fact that Whaleoil subscribers are better in bed, good looking and highly intelligent. Sometimes all at once! Please Click Here Now to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

  • I will be totally disillusioned with our Government if Bain receives as much as a single cent in compensation.
    Crime isn’t supposed to pay!

  • Pluto

    Until Mr Bain is willing to go on the stand and give answers to those awkward questions he has managed to evade to date, no sympathy from me.

    • Albert Lane

      So where did those bruises come from. The photo in the counterspin site clearly shows heavy bruising to the side of David Bain’s head, which apparently has never been explained.

  • TomTom

    I wish Joe Karam would stop with his comparison to David Dougherty’s case. Dougherty was actually proven innocent with the culprit found using DNA. Bain was acquitted because the Police didn’t do their work properly and the case can’t be proven – either way.

    So no, Joe, $1million per 3 years is not the yard stick to be using. At all.

    • JustTinkering

      Karem has just one agenda now. Get as much money as possible. It was never about Bain’s not guilty, it has always been about Karam. Interesting the Bain can’t front the media but Karem is always available for lengthy interviews and staged TV sets.

  • John1234

    The MSM really are up Bain/Karam’s backside on this as well. They report this recent development as a win of some sort for them… hello? Bain’s team asked for the review and have now asked for their own review to be canned. This is a win for them to can their own review… how?

    The trial evidence strongly suggests that Robin could not be the killer and that David probably was.

    Not one sent.

    • mommadog

      My thought entirely. I wont be surprised if he gets compensation but I will be totally royally hacked off. (I can think of stronger words but not for publication). I know it will be a debated subject for years to come but I am on the side of believing he is guilty, not his father and I will probably go to my grave believing that.

    • Cadwallader

      Yep. Smalleybrain was banging on about this last night to Larry. She is pro-Bain instinctively as it presents an opportunity to have a swipe at the government and in particular Judith Collins.

  • Bean

    It was either David or Robin and there is simply no credible evidence against Robin, I’ve even had intelligent people try to argue that it could have been a third party!

    One thing is for certain, most people have learnt that if they are ever in front of the court keep pleading innocence and despite overwhelming evidence theres a not unreasonable chance you’ll get away with it.

    • Cadwallader

      Won’t work for long in a Shariah court.

  • Ford

    It’s a pity that Peter Ellis didn’t have a Joe Karam on his side.

    • Time For Accountability

      But he did have the Judge in common who is acknowledged by the legal profession to have his decisions affected by his religious convictions.

      Bizarre would describe both cases.

      • David Moore

        I think that’s the truest statement in the whole thread, both were just bizarre.

    • Justsayn

      That is true.

      You can like him or hate him, and speculate as you wish on his motives, but the bottom line is that Karam has done good work for David.

      • Johnny Bravo

        If Bain was paid out how much would Karam get? Maybe somebody should ask Karam how much it would be?

        • Bobb

          That is irrelevant.

        • Justsayn

          I’m no Karam fan, but if Bain gets a payout Karam would deserve a healthy percentage – without Karam’s involvement I doubt there would have been an acquittal let alone any prospect of compensation.

          • Johnny Bravo

            Karam is very quiet on how much he would get from a Bain payout, I doubt he;s doing it for free

        • Word is he gets the lot.

          • Cadwallader

            Bain is now married so his wife may be entitled to 50% as it isn’t an inheritance. Begs the question: Was Bain’s wedding a shotgun one?

          • fairymai

            shotgun or not, I’m sure David would happily give to his wife and to Joe

        • Karma

          I’m sure I read somewhere on the David Bain Counterspin website that Joe Karam was to receive half of any compensation.

  • Quinton Hogg

    no, no a thousand times no.
    nothing for Mr Bain.

    • Bobb

      I am surprised you say that QH given your profession. There is certainly something fishy with the Bain case but whether he is innocent or guilty is not the issue here. The facts are that the process was flawed as evidenced by the Privy Council decision and therefore he was wrongly imprisoned on the facts as presented by the Police and the Prosecution. Therefore he should get compensated. Not to make him rich, but to put him where he could reasonably expect to be had he been free to continue his paper round and subsequent career. There have been too many cases where people who, on the balance of probability, were guilty anyway but were convicted wrongly on the evidence presented. We have a legal system in NZ in my opinion, not a justice system.

      • Justsayn

        His innocence is very much “the issue here”. Without proving it he is not entitled to a cent.

        BTW: The Privy Council did not say that he was wrongly imprisoned, merely that trial errors made the first verdict unsafe. When I read the Privy Council decision I actually got the impression they thought he was guilty, but that was not the question before them and they were careful not to express a view on it. You might want to re-read it. ( you can find a copy at )

        • Bobb

          No, I agree with you, but the fact that the verdict was unsafe means he was wrongfully imprisoned. An unsafe verdict means it wasn’t robustly proven so he shouldn’t have been found guilty on the evidence as presented. It doesn’t mean he is not guilty. As for compensation, AA Thomas was never proven innocent either.I think compensation is useful as a check and balance on the system. You cannot just lock someone up for years on a flawed process (whether or not they are guilty) and then just say sorry we got the process wrong but we think you are guilty anyway so f off.

          • Justsayn

            I’m not sure about the idea that anyone who is put in prison and later acquitted is, without any higher threshold, entitled to compensation. But it does have the advantage of being simpler.

            I doubt Thomas would qualify for compensation under the current criteria.

          • Warren Murray

            I accept the principal and point you make, but doesn’t it hinge upon the verdict of the last jury? I seriously doubt that decision was ‘safe’?

      • kayaker

        I agree, I don’t think we should be having a go at David Bain here, but at the system that got it wrong with a flawed process. That’s the issue.

  • jude

    I thought that compensation was only given if evidence proved David Bain was not guilty eg like a DNA sample for instance.
    The fact that he was found not guity in a second jury trial does not prove him innocent.
    I understood the law was quite clear on that?

    • mommadog

      I believe you have it right. He has not been found innocent. And as Pluto mentioned below he still has a lot of questions that need answering. If he does get compensation do you think he will give much of it to Joe to pay back all the money Joe spent on his legal defence over the years. I feel another book coming by Joe and getting some of his money back is a good reason to keep pushing for compensation.

  • Nebman

    I think you’ll find the Nats are just waiting to see which side the public fall behind before they decide. If enough people clamour for no money to be paid then he’ll get none.

    He shouldn’t get anything.

  • jcpry

    I have not heard one person say that David Bain didn’t do it. No-one I know has even expressed doubts that he was responsible. The government is on the horns of a dilemma with this. Pay him and there will be a muted outcry form a wide range of the community who think he should not get a cent or deny compensation and have Karam and Bain niggling away until the end of time and wasting taxpayers money.
    For me no compensation is the right answer but what price do you put on having this go away once and for all?.

    • Albert Lane

      And if he does receive compensation, will he will also become a beneficiary in the estate.

  • Justsayn

    I found the Karam line, that they just wanted to remove Collins from the decision making and that has happened for the judicial review is no longer necessary, amusing.

    The final decision was always Cabinets to make, not Collin’s. Collins may have been one voice at that table, but far from the most influential of them. No, if a change in the decision maker was a motive I think the change hoped for was a different Cabinet altogether, but the election result means he’s not getting that.

    Alternatively, the application for judicial review might have been withdrawn because is was pointless, and the accusations it made lacked proper evidential support. That may have always been the case. On top of that the Government was saying, well we are not going to decide anything until that review application is determined, so if Bain wanted the government to push ahead then he needed to give it up or wait.

    People can spin the withdrawal of the application for judicial review all they like, but that doesn’t make their spin reality.

    • Rachael Membery

      Judith might not be Justice Minister but she is still in cabinet, so not ‘gone’ as much as they would like..

      • Warren Murray

        Huh? JC is not in Cabinet.

  • Nyla

    they have no proof that david DIDNT kill them all, the fact pointed to david came home early from his paper run … and that father couldntve hav shot himself … but because david wasnt seen pulling the trigger, there is doubt, well Joe Karam stresses that point and jury has doubt …. and Joe has a book ready to be printed for when compensation comes (my opinion), because its all been about Joe so far, and his books. If I remember rightly his rugby was played the same way (another opinion)

  • Pete

    The same people who thinks Bain is innocent also believe that Islam is a religion of peace.!

    • I.M Bach

      I now have an image of an imam in one of those jerseys.

  • Huia

    Being not found guilty is quite different to being found innocent. He was NOT found to be innocent, he was found to be not guilty because of lack of evidence. In my mind there was plenty of evidence and the first two court cases got it right and he was put where he belonged.
    He was found to have planned the murders, even to having targets with 5 heads on he practiced shooting.
    He had timed and practiced the early morning paper run and made the unusual show of calling out to people (something he never ever did) so they could give him an alibi.
    The family were terrified of him especially his sisters and from what I have heard with good reason.
    He had his brothers blood on his underwear.
    He had marks on his body which showed he had been in a fight.
    He lied a few times in court about his glasses and some other things.
    Mr Bain seniors body was moved.
    Mr Bain senior didn’t have any blood on him and would have had should he have been the one to fight with his young healthy son.
    David Bain heard his sister gurgling and never did a thing about it.
    He came home and apparently found the 5 bodies then calmly put the washing on to wash out any evidence before dialing for help.
    There was innuendo and gossip presented about Mr Bain and his daughter as hard evidence which never should have been allowed.
    That same daughter would rather go to her father than stay within Davids reach…says something dosent it?
    The victim will not go to the abuser for protection, she will go to someone she feels safe with to get away from the abuser.
    There is a very strong rumour the so called witness was paid a large sum of money to come to court, only he absconded with the dollars, didn’t turn up for court and went to Australia.
    The last trial was a farce, team Karam went after Mr Bain senior who was twice the man his son will ever be, and totally tainted his reputation without one shred of proof.
    To shoot himself in the head, Mr Bain would have had arms like a gorilla (he didn’t), he would have to have a special hat made to hold the barrel in place and Joe Karam to help hold the stock. What a load of fairy tosh.
    The ambulance people and police were dead right, they got their man and all knew he was faking the so called fits and that he was guilty.
    The only court case where the jury had 100% bought into the media/Karam spin, they spent half their time asleep, some were knitting, passing notes, giggling and reading, not to forget one baking the accused a birthday cake!
    In my opinion David Bain is very, very lucky to be where he is today, and in my honest opinion there should not be one more dollar paid to that team.

  • Ilovelife

    This whole case disgusts me. How anyone could even suggest he didn’t do it is beyond me. I wonder how much Karam stands to gain from all this? He has probably done a deal with David hoping it is a 7 figure sum awarded. That message left on the computer was one of the more obvious clues. Couldn’t write it on paper because his writing would have been recognised.

    • Frosty78

      I feel quite ill thinking of Bain (more so Karam) with any $ from this. So many odd things occurred, computer note, doing washing , dad’s full bladder etc that point the finger at only one person….”the only one that deserved to live…”

    • Justsayn

      One of the things that troubles me about the suggestion his father did it is why would his father kill the rest, spare David, but also appear to take steps to try and frame David.

      As you point out, why write the note by hand, and sign it. Easier, quicker, more direct. There are many other examples as well. There may be a theory about all of that, but I haven’t heard it yet (can anyone enlighten me?).

      • Second time around

        Typed suicide notes written by the victim are exceedingly rare, although faked handwritten notes are common. Virginia Woolf typed a long suicide essay, prepared well in advance, but she was a writer, not a primary school teacher and it was typed because she typed most of her literary works, not because she couldn’t find paper or writing implements around her.

  • kehua

    The version I saw, Karam did not say Judith Collins was replaced, he said she was `sacked`.

  • Orange

    If David had been speeding on his paper round he’d never have been let out.

  • Forrest Ranger

    I think Amy needs to borrow Winston’s NO sign

  • hbboy

    It sounds as if in NZ we are guilty until proven innocent. Isn’t that what Angry Andy was proposing last year?
    Bain spent time in the slammer for a crime he didn’t do (according to the courts) so he deserves compensation. $5M would be fair.

    • Justsayn

      No, the second jury said that it was not proven beyond reasonable doubt that he did it, hence acquitted him. But there is a yawning gap between “not-guilty” and innocent. To get compensation the person needs to prove they are more likely than not innocent.

      If David is entitled to compensation without first proving his innocence, then you better have your chequebook ready as the queue forms.

    • Johnny Bravo

      Does every person who is found not guilty deserve a payout?

    • mike

      There is no legal right to compensation for wrongful conviction and imprisonment. However, the Government in its discretion can compensate someone wrongfully convicted and imprisoned by making an ex gratia payment.

      Compensation under the following scheme is only payable to persons who:
      a) are imprisoned following a wrongful conviction that is subsequently set aside;
      b) are, at a minimum, innocent on the balance of probabilities.

      The Cabinet guidelines require claimants to:
      a) be alive at the time of application
      b) have served all or part of a sentence of imprisonment
      c) have received a free pardon or have had their convictions quashed on appeal without order of retrial.

      The Cabinet guidelines contemplate three kinds of compensation for successful claimants:
      a) payments for non-pecuniary losses following conviction (for example, loss of liberty or emotional harm) – based on a starting figure of $100,000 for each year in custody
      b) payments for pecuniary losses following conviction (for example, loss of livelihood and future earnings)
      c) a public apology or statement of innocence.

      So lets check the boxes, lets say for arguments sake he meets the first two requirements. Does he meet the three requirements in the Cabinet Manual? Has he had his conviction quashed? For the sake of the argument lets say he does… fine give him his “compensation”, just say sorry. Don’t give him any money, he really hasn’t lost any future income (he was a paper boy with no real prospects)… make a public apology for imprisonment (don’t say he was wrongfully imprisoned) and don’t say he was innocent.

      Problem solved, Bain and Karam can then bugger off.

      • Warren Murray

        I’ve also come out against him receiving compensation, but I don’t agree that should somehow be due to the job he had at the time of the murders or any presumption he would not have made a career later.

  • D.Dave

    Clearly, IMO, the whole payout,if it occurs, should be based on David proving his innocence. To date I have not heard a whimper pass his lips in his own defence. His serial-trougher mouthpiece, has a vested interest in 7 figure payouts. Karam should butt out. If Mr Bain cannot front up and do the job himself then he gets nothing…. zippo….null….nix… I know one of jury that found him not guilty, she is as nutty as the proverbial “squirrel s#@*….

    • stanace

      Not 7 figure payouts, 8 figures when I saw him on TV last night.

  • Johnny Bravo

    So if David gets a payout because he was found not guilty at court does this apply to everybody who is found not guilty at court? You cannot compare the david bain and david dougherty case as dougherty was proved innocent through DNA, whereas Bain has not.

  • Carl

    He should get nothing, if he does will he pay back all his legal aid money he got given, I can see flying pigs before that happens.

  • Ilovelife

    And another reason to despise the MSM. Who can forget Wendy Petrie fist pumping when he was found not guilty at the 2nd trial?

    • stephen2d

      What about the head juror’s husband discussing the case and all during the trial proclaiming loudly “he’s innocent”… I should have said something at the time, just didn’t realise where it will lead.

  • Bombastic

    I’m not at all in favour of the former paper-boy becoming a multi-millionaire on our coin. As others have said, not guilty does not equal innocent.

    • Johnny Bravo

      Maybe the government could shout him a new 10 speed bike and 5k for loss of earnings as a paperboy?

      • Dumrse

        Somebody needs to give him a new cardie.

  • RockinBob625

    Heard Mr Karam on National Radio this morning. He spun the story his own way and continued to harp on about Judith Collins. The interviewer had to put him in his place to keep it moving. It all progressed as expected until she asked him about how much he would get from the whole settlement process. At that point he danced on the head of a pin for a bit. Seems “David and his team” will be settled. The team members being the lawyers etc. Still no straight answer to the question was received.

    It was lovely to hear Mr Karam uneasy – how much is 40% of sweet bother all, Joe?

    • Albert Lane

      It’s interesting that the emphasis is on Judith Collins – not on David Bain. I see that Bain did not give evidence at the re-trial, and yes, I know that it can’t be construed as the act of a guilty person, but he had nothing to lose by giving evidence, or was he worried about the level of cross-examination?

  • Johnopkb

    It strikes me as remarkable that so many contributors to the discussion would deny Bain compensation on the basis that he has not proven his innocence. In a very similar case in May 2011, the UK Supreme Court (formerly the House of Lords), the leading opinion was delivered by Baroness Hale. Hale is accepted as one of the Common Law world’s leading jurists at the moment.

    She made a strong point in finding that three ex prisoners, now found not guilty, should receive compensation for time spent in jail: “Innocence as such is not a concept known to our criminal justice system”.

    Nobody is required to prove their innocence when accused of a crime. It is the job of a prosecutor to convince a jury (or a judge alone) of guilt. So please, put up arguments about whether or not compensation should be paid, but don’t base them on a spurious requirement for innocence.

    • jude

      I believe our legal system does have a clause that states compensation is only made if innocence is proven. ie New evidence proves an otherwise guilty person innocent.
      Juries can be fickle. The concept of reasonable doubt is too low a threshold to grant millions in compensation in my opinion.

      • Johnopkb

        You are, of course, correct that there is a clause about innocence, although absolute proof is not called for. Baroness Hale’s opinion saw the abolishment of such a clause in the UK system, as it should in any jurisdiction in which all people are deemed innocent until proven guilty.

        As for the fickleness of juries, it is as it has ever been. If we are to mistrust the jury system, we will have to agree on another. We should remember though, that there are far worse systems in use around the world in which there is no presumption of innocence

        • nudgy

          Bain was not found innocent at his second trial. The Crown failed to establish that he was guilty beyond reasonable doubt. The boot is now on the other foot. Bain now has to prove he is innocent beyond reasonable doubt in order to get compensation. In other words he has to prove that he has been wrongly imprisoned.The only way he can do that is to prove beyond reasonable doubt that someone else killed his family. He has come nowhere near reaching this legal threshold to date.

  • geoff

    It seems to me Bain wants his cake and eat it.
    He refused to give evidence at his second trial, after making such a hash of it at his first. Yet he still expects compensation.

    • jude

      If he wants money maybe he should pen his own autobiography, instead of letting Karam publish at will and profit:)

    • Huia

      He refused or wasn’t allowed to by his team?
      I remember that time he was interviewed outside the court, Bain said with a smirk “I know what happened, I was the only one there”, it prompted Joe to shut him down real quick.
      So only imagine what he would have said on the stand which would have discredited the fairy story being presented.

      • Justsayn

        Did he really say that? He was only there if he had a gun in his hand… otherwise he was on his paper run.

        • Huia

          Yes he did, they were walking away from the court with the usual entourage of fans who had bought into the hype. A reporter asked him a question about who he thought had killed the family and that was the answer. The look on Karam’s face =priceless. Never saw that newsclip again, very quickly shut down methinks.

    • Harriet Bond

      Joe Karam also wants his cake and to eat it regarding Dean Cottle. Dean Cottle was the basis for the first Appeals and the whole load of codswallop that set the Gravy Train in motion. Yet where was he at the 2009 Retrial? MIA, that’s where, told Karam he wouldn’t testify, that if forced to ‘My memory will have failed me” (and laughed)….The Bain Defence team conducted a whole charade around getting a warrant issued for Dean to appear, he skipped off (or so the police were told, so they didnt look for him) and we are all supposed to simply overlook this fact? that the basis of the entire ‘Robin and Laniet’ fiction, was unable and unwilling to deliver on the original claims after 13 years of Joe Karam making huge mileage out of those claims?? The Bain defence were going to have him declared a ‘Hostile Witness’ after the Crown tried unsuccessfully to call him to get him on the stand and finally put up or shut up….I am still waiting for some journalist with a pair of balls to ask Karam all about that charade. The MSM are gutless when it comes to making JK answer the oh so awkward questions, and DEAN COTTLE is top of the list.

  • Iera

    In January 2013, Bain filed a claim in the High Court seeking a review of Collins’ actions. The claim alleges Collins breached natural justice and the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act, “acted in bad faith, abused her power, and acted in a biased, unreasonable and predetermined manner”.

    Since Collin’s decision is not now to be legally challenged, one assumes the report by former High Court Judge Robert Fisher still stands, that it “would be unsafe to act upon the Binnie report”.

    For Karam, Collins is out of his way, but surely her now unchallenged decision and High Court Judge Robert Fisher’s finding are not dismissed.

  • Second time around

    The Binnie Report determined that he was innocent despite even Binnie not being prepared to state in clear unequivocal language that the only other suspect, Robin Bain, had committed the murders (he says instead that there was “smoke but no fire”- the smoke of his $400000 fee going up the chimney without shedding any light perhaps). Binnie poisoned his own report by asking for and reading the Karam books. Clearly he wanted to be told a coherent story rather than to sort out the facts himself, and that alone is sufficient to cast major doubts on his process and his conclusions. It is fundamental to Karam’s case that Binnie’s report should be accepted uncritically, but has cabinet lost the will to read it?

    • Huia

      Not to mention he had a visit from Karam in Canada to discuss the case. Unbiased….don’t think do.

      • Second time around

        I don’t think deliberately biased, but so lacking in experience in assessing evidence that he appears naive or even biased. Fisher’s report is much better on that matter and certainly needs to be read alongside Binnie’s effort.

        • Huia

          So why not a visit from the prosecuting team as well then?
          It has been very one sided media campaign with dollars the goal at the end.

  • stephen2d

    I saw David Bain two days ago in Christchurch, dressed in a high vis vest and with a helmet on, working on a construction job nearby. I don’t trust him and I wasn’t even around when the events occurred so have no bias from old media reports, etc.

  • jay

    Those of you interested in the facts of this case should take a look at It’s easy to navigate and sums up the evidence and the case really nicely.

    In reading the evidence it is clear that David is the offender, and that I imagine is why Judith Collins didn’t want to give him a red cent

    Joe Karam and the vile lawyer they engaged (who’s name escapes me ) should both hang their heads in shame.

    • Albert Lane

      I have read the counterspin document, and the photos and information are shattering. I was out of the country at the time of the retrial, and don’t know what evidence couldn’t be presented at that trial, but the information on the counterspin site is enough for me to know that the original finding was correct.

  • Scotty

    I read this pearler from Joe Karam in the ODT this morning.

    ”The evidence that proves David Bain is innocent is bulletproof and, on that basis, I would expect the Government to accept that evidence for the quality that it is.”

    I don’t know about anyone else but in my world the evidence he claims doesn’t even remotely exist.

    • Cadwallader

      Bulletproof? it is a pity the family wasn’t too.

    • Huia

      The evidence against David is bullet proof.
      Blood from Stephen on his socks underwear and shirt, marks on his body from the fight with Stephen, remember he never went into Stephens room apparently.
      Broken glasses from the fight which he is still lying about.
      Davids fingerprints in blood on the gun, NOT Robins.
      There is too much proof to be glossed over any longer, more people have woken up to the Karam hype and are questioning the so called evidence against Robin.
      I hope Amy Adams does too but don’t hold out much hope as David wont open his mouth, and Karam will dominate any talking or sue anyone with an opposing view of the propaganda.

      • kaykaybee

        Yes, litigation has been substantial in closing down dissenters and other’s opinions.He has sought to shut down those who questioned him, challenged his motives and his interpretation of events.
        The best book on the Bain murders was written during the first trial by one of our most revered and esteemed academics, erudite thinker and writer Sir James McNeish KNZM. The veritable library of speculative pieces (in my opinion) written by the ex rugby, ex league, businessman are just penny dreadfuls in comparison to this excellent analysis.

  • LesleyNZ

    Not one cent Amy Adams. Last night and today Joe and the mainstream media started an intense campaign to pressurise John Key, Amy Adams and his cabinet into giving David Bain compensation money. Will John Key, Amy Adams and his cabinet cave into this media pressure to compensate David Bain? They had better not pay David Bain and his support team ANY compensation money. Here are 2 cropped photos of Robin Bain taken 29.05.94 – 3 weeks before he was murdered.I cropped the photos to protect the privacy of the other people in the photos. This was at a genealogy meeting that Robin Bain had helped organised at very short notice. He was NOTHING like how Joe Karam’s witness described him to be (a year earlier than this photo) – a “walking cadaver”. “Robin Bain looked like a “walking cadaver,” according to a Ministry of Education official who carried out an Education Review Office report on Dunedin’s Taieri Beach School when he was principal in 1993.”

    Not one cent of taxpayer money in the way of compensation should go to David Bain.

    • Harriet Bond

      well Robin actually attended a Geneology meetup the Sunday afternoon, the day before he was murdered, after he took his sons to the Polar midwinter swim.

      • LesleyNZ

        I thought that I read that a folder containing family genealogy info was found in his caravan. Robin was busy researching the family tree. He was nothing at all like Joe Karam and his witnesses have made him out to be.

  • Karma

    Personally I don’t think he should get a cent. However, if he does receive compensation it should be based on his employment at the time of his arrest – paper boy. What’s that in lost wages? a couple of grand?

  • kaykaybee

    It is my opinion that 5 innocent members of one family were summarily executed and that the person who murdered them was the sole survivor , the man-boy who destroyed all the blood evidence in the wash before police arrived. I do not believe David Bain or Mr Karam should receive one cent when 5 members of Bain’s family lie dead in their graves with bullet holes to their heads.
    It’s my opinion that more than the compensation for Bain Mr Karam desires to continue the Bain industry, from which it appears he has become famous himself and possibly profited. I have visions of him clutching a screenplay and flying off to Hollywood with the already penned final chapter. I see two protagonists – the lesser is the finally innocent man and the greater his long-suffering champion. Ahh the triumph over adversity.

    I have never believed a word of David Bain’s defence and it would be a travesty and precedent to compensate in any manner. I hope Adams is listening.

    • Huia

      5 people dead, one walks away.
      Gee, I wonder who dun it.

      • Albert Lane

        I heard on the radio today, that he had even written some sort of essay describing how he would do away with his family.

        • Wayne McDougall

          You may be thinking of where schoolfriends report he had written a detailed plan for committing rape, with the timing of his paper round as an alibi.

          • Albert Lane

            I have only just read about it in comments above. Did you get to read the Counterspin reference noted in Jay’s comment a bit further down on this sheet. The reference shows photos of bodies without any censorship, and it has a photo of David Bain, complete with bruises. The whole matter is quite horrifying. And where there is smoke, there is fire.

  • Clutch Cargo

    If Robin Bain was the person who left the computer message saying that David was the only one who deserved to live…..why did he go to so much trouble to frame him.
    I heard a university law lecturer this morning on the radio say that the starting point formula for caluculating compensation for wrongful imprisonment is $450 per day!!!!!. Thirteen years x 365 days x $450 = $2.135 mil. Not bad for a paper boy.

  • Scottish law has the concept of ‘not proven’ which is really what we have with Bain There is far too much equivocation regarding the evidence and I doubt it clear cut enough to compensate him. No doubt he will be though as there is huge pressure being exercised by his supporters.

    A person who really should get compensation is Peter Ellis, victim of a gross travesty of justice and a witch hunt led by latter day Salemites calling themselves health professionals. When you stand Bains demand next to Ellis it is clear a person who deserves huge compensation is ignored because he hasn’t got the Karam machine working for him.

    Bain shouldn’t get a cent.and the law, as usual, is an ass.

    • caochladh

      Totally agree. There have been many cases tried in this country that would have seen justice better served with a “Not Proven” verdict, so that when new, indisputable primary evidence comes to light, their backside can be dragged back before the court for justice to be dispensed.

    • Justsayn

      It may also take a bit of the pressure of a jury… they might actually be less likely to find guilt in a marginal case if they are able to express their doubt rather than be trumpeted as having found innocence.

  • MAWG

    It’s easy to think that if 5 people are dead, then the one who is left is guilty. If that is the case, then the police have done themselves no favours in ensuring that other theories, such as Robyn Bain carrying out the killings, was disproved. There is a tendancy among the police to focus on one suspect to the detriment of other suspects and theories, as evidenced by the convictions of David Dogherty, Aaron Farmer, Arthur Allen Thomas, the young Maori women who were wrongly arrested, convicted and compensated about 2 years ago, and of course, Peter Ellis.

    I am not convinced of either Bains guilt or innocence, but in order to believe the police version of events, you have to believe that David killed his mother, brother and sisters, and then went on a paper run, leaving his father who could wake up, and raise the alarm during the time it took to complete.

    Surely that version of events is open to challenge. David’s assertion at the time of the murders was that his father had carried out the killings. Not enough was done by the police to disprove that, and that is why we are here now.

    • Hemimck

      Suggest you read the counterspin link below.
      If he had put himself up for cross examination and survived the jury in the second trial maybe a case could be made for compo. But he didn’t.

    • botti

      He’d suggested the paper run as an alibi previously apparently.

      “The Court of Appeal today lifted suppression on another set of evidence – which suggested that Mr Bain planned, as a 17 or 18-year-old, to commit a sexual offence (presumably rape) against a young female jogger.

      The High Court had allowed the evidence but it was knocked out on appeal and was not heard by the jury for the trial that finished in Christchurch last week.

      It appeared Mr Bain had put his plan to writing in a notebook, Mr Bain’s schoolboy friend Mark Buckley was going to say.

      Another friend, Gareth Taylor, who the police also wanted to call as a witness, said he had a similar conversation with Mr Bain in 1989. Mr Bain left Dunedin’s Bayfield High School after seventh form in 1990.

      The Court of Appeal noted that the neither witness attributed the word “rape” to Mr Bain however the word is used by the Court for ease of reference.

      The plan was to free up time for his offending by arriving at the usual time at houses where he would normally see witnesses (suggesting a normal delivery round) but delivering papers at other houses much earlier than usual.

      Mr Buckley, who was not interviewed by the police until after the Privy Council decision in 2007, made a statement saying Mr Bain had told him about the plan when they were both 17 or 18 and probably in the 7th form at Bayfield High School.

      He did not take the conversation seriously at the time but it concerned Mr Bain’s sexual interest in a female jogger he saw early in the morning when he was doing his paper run. Mr Bain had talked about “getting away with it” by relying on his paper round and had referred to a notebook that he produced.”

  • Harriet Bond

    Huia, you mentioned something interesting, you say that Karam visited Binnie in Canada, can you enlighten us more on this please? cheers

    • Huia

      I remember reading it somewhere and thinking the Judge needed to have been changed if that was the case, I have been trolling the archives trying to find it. Will post the reference when I do.

      • Harriet Bond

        cheers for that, cos I seem to recall reading once that Joe claimed he had not met with Binnie personallly, – in NZ…. If he did got o Canada, then it explains a few things. thanks.

      • Odd Ball

        It would fall under the category of undue influence if karam contacted Binnie before he completed his report. It also validates Judith Collins actions as well.

    • Huia

      Cannot find the reference yet so have removed the post until I can verify it.

      • Harriet Bond

        cheers :)

  • Catriona

    Well, I wasn’t there to witness the events and I certainly wasn’t in Court and heard all the evidence so I have no opinion and I suggest those of you who also weren’t there, weren’t in Court or on a jury etc. etc. that you cannot state categorically that a person ‘did it’ now can you? I remain neutral on the subject.

    • “The mask of sanity” is a good read to start with

  • Iera

    Karam has indicated in the past that he does not consider David Bain to be familiar with details of the case as he himself, Karam, is. And it is fully possible David Bain has convinced himself he did not slaughter his own family, although the balance of evidence suggests he well may have done so. If 12 years jail has allowed this mind change, and allowed him to live with himself, why should tax payers compensate him for that advantage?

    • Harriet Bond

      well, even Karam’s version of events has changed from book to book, and over time. …and how many QCs has he blown through altogether now on the Bian case? I’ve lost count.

  • Harriet Bond
  • LesleyNZ

    Those who worked with Robin Bain knew him. Joe Karam never knew Robin Bain or met him.
    Tribute to Robin Bain .mov –
    Those who were friends with Laniet Bain, or taught her at school – knew her. Joe Karam never knew Laniet or met her.
    Tribute to Laniet Bain .mov –

  • D.Dave

    Just as a point of interest, if David Bain did receive a payout, could the Bain family take a civil case against him for wrongful death, and therefore sue him for millions? If so, I would encourage them to do so, as I believe David could be compelled to take the stand. Perhaps then we may hear it all from ‘the horses mouth’…..

    • Captain Darling

      There’re all dead mate.

      • D.Dave

        Not so, I believe he may have another brother living in the South Island. I was referring to the Bain family in an extended way, siblings of Robin and Margaret……

  • Alright

    A suggestion: all the nutbars (including members the last jury) who believe him innocent write out cheques and post them to David.

    Two people (at least) who won’t be sending you money: Judith and me.

  • Warren Murray

    I am no great supporter of Collins (not a hater either btw). BUT, IMO, she was absolutely correct to order a review of Binney’s report when he went waay beyond the terms of his brief.

    Collins has my respect for that. She knew the public would be appalled by a taxpayer funded bonus being awarded to someone that most people still believe to be involved.

    Being found ‘not guilty’ by the latest jury, which did not hear testimony from Bain (unlike the first jury), does not make him innocent. It simply says the prosecution failed to meet the test of beyond reasonable doubt.

    The last jury’s behaviour during and after the trail also calls into question whether that verdict was ‘safe’.

    IMO Bain remains the most likely suspect. Remember that Robin hasn’t been subject to any judicial process so hasn’t been convicted either.

    I would not like to see Bain receive any money while there remains reasonable doubt that he is innocent.

    • Harriet Bond

      I agree, I have never been a National voter, but applaud Collins for her tough stance. She could have easily just gone along with the BS and sheeted the fallout home to Simon Power, but she chose not to..Bravo Lady! Re; the Binnie Report, the new Bain book due out in a couple of weeks will cover the Binnie report quite extensively, with plenty of focus on the Binnie interview with Bain.


    Sad to see that quite a few readers/commenters are ‘judge/jury & executeners’.

    • botti

      It’s interesting to read what wasn’t admitted – unreal that he had suggested the paper run as an alibi previously!

      LATEST: A heavily-disputed ‘confession’ in David Bain’s 111 ambulance call and an alleged plan to rape a female jogger using his paper round as an alibi can finally be revealed after court suppression orders were lifted today.

      The evidence was not deemed to be reliable or relevant to David Bain’s retrial for the murder of five members of his family. He was found not guilty on all charges last Friday.

      “I shot the prick,” Mr Bain is alleged to have said, according to long-hidden material the Supreme Court today revealed could be released.

      But his lawyers say no one can even agree there are words. ”It’s not evidence, it’s nonsense,” Helen Cull, QC told the Supreme Court today.

      Also today, the Court of Appeal lifted suppression on evidence suggesting that Mr Bain planned, as a 17 or 18-year-old, to rape a young female jogger…


      The Court of Appeal today lifted suppression on another set of evidence – which suggested that Mr Bain planned, as a 17 or 18-year-old, to commit a sexual offence (presumably rape) against a young female jogger.

      The High Court had allowed the evidence but it was knocked out on appeal and was not heard by the jury for the trial that finished in Christchurch last week.

      It appeared Mr Bain had put his plan to writing in a notebook, Mr Bain’s schoolboy friend Mark Buckley was going to say.

      Another friend, Gareth Taylor, who the police also wanted to call as a witness, said he had a similar conversation with Mr Bain in 1989. Mr Bain left Dunedin’s Bayfield High School after seventh form in 1990.

      The Court of Appeal noted that the neither witness attributed the word “rape” to Mr Bain however the word is used by the Court for ease of reference.

      The plan was to free up time for his offending by arriving at the usual time at houses where he would normally see witnesses (suggesting a normal delivery round) but delivering papers at other houses much earlier than usual.

      Mr Buckley, who was not interviewed by the police until after the Privy Council decision in 2007, made a statement saying Mr Bain had told him about the plan when they were both 17 or 18 and probably in the 7th form at Bayfield High School.

      He did not take the conversation seriously at the time but it concerned Mr Bain’s sexual interest in a female jogger he saw early in the morning when he was doing his paper run. Mr Bain had talked about “getting away with it” by relying on his paper round and had referred to a notebook that he produced.”

  • When I hear Bain’s initial defense lawyer commenting that “Karam goes around the country telling half truths and quarter truths” then something doesn’t smell right.

  • Warren Murray

    Opinion here is clearly running against David.

    Quite a few have commented that $millions of public money has been spent on this and a silver lining to any payment will bring some closure to a story that has been running for decades.

    I doubt it. Either way, People will be raking the coals of this for many more years yet. Also, I suspect that if David receives compensation, after Karem and the lawyers get their cut, David will then be lining up his wider family to recover the estate from them.