Group fights Bain compo bid

David Bain, left and his supporter Joe Karam emerge from the High Court after Bain was found not guilty of the murder of his family. Photo by NZPA
David Bain, left and his supporter Joe Karam emerge from the High Court after Bain was found not guilty of the murder of his family. Photo by NZPA
A group of people who believe David Bain killed his family are launching a fight to prevent him getting any compensation or inheritance money.

Mr Bain, who spent 13 years behind bars for the murder of five of his family members in 1993, was adjudged not guilty of the murders at a High Court retrial ending in June.

Mr Bain's supporters, who say his father Robin killed the family members and then took his own life, have said they would seek compensation from the state for his years in prison.

But Justice For Robin Bain, formed from the Facebook group David Bain Is Guilty, is lobbying to prevent this happening.

Spokesman Kent Parker said a website had been set up and a petition would be started.

Letters had also been written to Justice Minister Simon Power, who will decide whether compensation should be examined.

"We believe the evidence overwhelmingly points to David as the murderer, and that he should not make money from what he did.

"An acquittal based on spurious `what if?' scenarios is not an argument for innocence."

Mr Parker said the group had no connection with any parties in the trial, or to Bain's family.

Mr Bain must apply to the Justice Minister for compensation, after which the matter may be referred to a Queen's Counsel for investigation.

Unlike in the trial, where prosecutors had to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Mr Bain was guilty, Mr Bain has to prove he is innocent on the balance of probabilities before he can gain compensation.

Joe Karam, who spearheaded the long battle to free Mr Bain, said last week Mr Bain would be able to do that and comments to the contrary were ill-informed.

"The evidence in the trial, I am saying, supports unequivocally that David Bain, on the balance of probabilities, is innocent of these crimes," he said.

The amount of compensation takes account of the length of jail time served and the claimant's conduct. The base rate for each year served is $100,000.

Mr Bain is also expected to try to claim his family inheritance.

 

Well now you can enjoy our company

It's amazing what a little publicity can do. Now, tk84, you know all about us and can follow us with all the eagerness you clearly have for this matter.

didn't see any facebook groups complaining..

when they decided to use tax payer money for a retrial.

Motive what motive?

And so am I not allowed to question the 'evidence' in the retrial, especially the 3 witnesses who had their testimony suppressed? Do I not have good reason too?

A fair trial?

Joe Karam questioned the so-called 'evidence' in the first trial with good reason. A motive is more relevant than that which is not set in stone.

A fair trial was had in 1995

Good points, Roller, but a fair trial was already conducted in 1995. The retrial in 2009 was not fair because of the amount of public exposure the trial facts have received and the removal of sub judice. You should ask Joe Karam why he questioned the verdict of the original trial and ask him to examine his assumptions.

Interesting question, but not relevant

Roller, I suggest you have a good look at the evidence. Motive would only be relevant if all other things were equal, but they are not.

It's our money

"surely it is no-one's business except David's, the members of his extended family and the Government?" Except the Government = all of us. It is our business if David Bain wants tax money.

It's no-one's business

It's no-one's business except ... and the Government according to tk84, but when that "business" is a large-scale pay-out that makes it taxpayers' business.

What is it to them?

Why do these people who have 'no connection to the family' care what happens from now on in? I'm not here to comment on if i think he is guilty or not just to ask the question Why do they care so much? surely it is no-one's business except David's, the members of his extended family and the Government?

Re-examine assumptions

Civilised societies like to believe that individuals get a fair hearing and that the justice system gets it right most of the time. Rather than question the verdict, maybe the doubters should re-examine their own assumptions for possible errors? The first question they should be able to answer is: Why would a healthy young man murder his entire family?