![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
Chocmilk03 removed Binnie's observation that the police never came up with a motive for David to kill his family because he thinks this was Binnie's opinion. If you start removing 'opinions', that would include the opinions of the prosecutor, the opinions of the judge, the jury and everyone else involved. Pretty much everthing about the case is someone's opinion - that's why it was so controversial.
Although in this case, the police never came up with a motive. That's a fact - not an opinion. And the lack of motive for David is an important part of the story. Straining ( talk) 05:08, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
Judge Binnie later noted that the police never came up with a plausible motive for David to kill his entire family, although the prosecution suggested he was 'triggered' by a minor and long-running argument with his father about use of a chainsaw.
It comes in part by way of admission by the Applicant (David Bain) himself, of an expressed hatred for his father, his objection to his father's attempt to dominate the household, his wish to see his father excluded from the household and the family, and his arguments with his father, including a very recent [and recurrent] one over the use of a chainsaw ... [...] ... There is further evidence of abnormality of behaviour ... He spoke several times of "black hands" coming to take away the family ... He had fallen into a kind of trance more than once.
Judge Binnie was of the view that the police never came up with a plausible motive for David to kill his entire family, while Judge Callinan referred to David's admissions of hatred for his father who he saw as dominating the household and recent arguments with his father, as well as to evidence of "abnormality of behaviour" on David's part.
As a result, the jury remained unaware that Robin Bain was depressed or that he had a possible motive to get rid of his family and commit suicide.
By way of contrast, Judge Binnie interviewed David over an entire day when conducting his inquiry and described him as a "credible witness".
Judith Collins, the new Justice Minister, disagreed with Binnie's conclusions and sought feedback on his report from the police, the Solicitor-General and former High Court judge Robert Fisher without consulting Cabinet, and before releasing it to David's legal team. Fisher claimed that Binnie had made significant errors of principle, so Collins decided another report into Bain's compensation claim would have to be commissioned.
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
Chocmilk03 removed Binnie's observation that the police never came up with a motive for David to kill his family because he thinks this was Binnie's opinion. If you start removing 'opinions', that would include the opinions of the prosecutor, the opinions of the judge, the jury and everyone else involved. Pretty much everthing about the case is someone's opinion - that's why it was so controversial.
Although in this case, the police never came up with a motive. That's a fact - not an opinion. And the lack of motive for David is an important part of the story. Straining ( talk) 05:08, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
Judge Binnie later noted that the police never came up with a plausible motive for David to kill his entire family, although the prosecution suggested he was 'triggered' by a minor and long-running argument with his father about use of a chainsaw.
It comes in part by way of admission by the Applicant (David Bain) himself, of an expressed hatred for his father, his objection to his father's attempt to dominate the household, his wish to see his father excluded from the household and the family, and his arguments with his father, including a very recent [and recurrent] one over the use of a chainsaw ... [...] ... There is further evidence of abnormality of behaviour ... He spoke several times of "black hands" coming to take away the family ... He had fallen into a kind of trance more than once.
Judge Binnie was of the view that the police never came up with a plausible motive for David to kill his entire family, while Judge Callinan referred to David's admissions of hatred for his father who he saw as dominating the household and recent arguments with his father, as well as to evidence of "abnormality of behaviour" on David's part.
As a result, the jury remained unaware that Robin Bain was depressed or that he had a possible motive to get rid of his family and commit suicide.
By way of contrast, Judge Binnie interviewed David over an entire day when conducting his inquiry and described him as a "credible witness".
Judith Collins, the new Justice Minister, disagreed with Binnie's conclusions and sought feedback on his report from the police, the Solicitor-General and former High Court judge Robert Fisher without consulting Cabinet, and before releasing it to David's legal team. Fisher claimed that Binnie had made significant errors of principle, so Collins decided another report into Bain's compensation claim would have to be commissioned.