There was the OIC of the investigation who at a party celebrating David's guilty verdict, wrote something akin to "Burn in hell David" on a wall being renovated.
Not evidence of a frame job, just evidence that the cop felt he was guilty. Might make him reluctant to pursue alternative suspects, but is miles from framing Bain. Also, his is the guy with the best over view of the case, he ws obviously convinced.
I think also the investigation took a personal toll on him and he was relieving frustration. Certainly they never did follow any lines of enquiry regarding Robin being the killer.
Well, not that we are aware of. I would imagine they would have discussed the theory at least once Bain started claiming it. But as was noted in the trial, the evidence was too inconsistent to make Robin a credible suspect and if you look at the defences approach in the most recent trial, it was largely about portraying Robin as someone who was mentally capable of killing everyone to sow enough doubt to let David walk.
And the defence posited because some blood on Robin's hand wasn't tested, that it might've been Stephen or Laniet's blood and so how could that have got there if David was the killer? And more smoke and mirrors about incest, destruction of trial evidence and contamination of the scene.
The OIC commented that motive had to be tied to evidence and there was none tying Robin to being the murderer.
there will be many on this thread who will not accept the QC's judgement.
i will not be one of them
i noticed today that there is a rumour going around the media that
"Canadian judge Ian Binnie, who was reviewing the case for compensation, has reportedly come to the conclusion Bain is, on the balance of probability, innocent of the murders of his family members and should receive compensation." http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/bain...iction-5071213
some of you didnt believe there was a smear campaign
so probably dont yet realise that this rumor is in fact a leak
now, once this becomes official,
cabinet will have to consider whether to give him compo or not.
(protip: the outcome, like the others on this thread, is obvious.)
I think Bain is as guilty as ****, but the point still stands that if he was legally found not-guilty and spent a decade in jail then legally he must be given compensation. I cannot see how you can throw someone in jail for a decade and then not give them any payout.
Yea apart from the trial evidence, he's asked for Joe Karams totally unbiased books. This is why a person in their 70's with a history of bias against the crown, and almost total legal career of property and corporate law, was an idiotic choice for independant review of this, but hey, so beyond caring any more.