Your Views: David Bain and the justice system

The Privy Council has quashed the 12-year-old murder convictions of David Bain for killing five members of his family.

But he will have to stay in jail while the authorities here decide if he should face a retrial.

Does this shake your faith in the justice system?

This forum debate has now closed. Here is a selection of your views on the topic.Some comments have been edited for legal reasons.

Cheery (Devonport)
I think that to deny that a final court picked not only from a 60 million population of the U.K., but also Commonwealth countries will give a better judicial result than one picked from our very small pool of people, is to take nationalism to a new level. The U.K. appears to have no problem exposing their own system to the light of the European Court of Justice. Surely it would be good to have a final decision made by such a high level of experience that is unconnected with our own system, and owns no allegiance to the small group of judges that make up that system.

Reece Palmer
Lets get one thing straight here, David Bain's convictions have been quashed because the Privy Council found that "a substantial miscarriage of justice had actually occurred". He has not been found innocent yet, although it would seem many (myself included) believe him to be so. Several key pieces of evidence were either disregarded or willfully ignored as the police believed they had their man. These have been shown by the decision of the Privy Council to be absolutely relevant to the case. The only correct outcome here is that David Bain faces trial again with all evidence available to the defence and jury. I believe this will see him vindicated as innocent and will clear the way for a large chunk of Dr Cullen's surplus to be awarded in compensation. I also believe that David Bain being the strong willed person he must have been to get through this life destroying series of events, will want his day in court (again) and will achieve ultimately the satisfaction he deserves of a not guilty verdict. Who would want the conviction or stigma still hanging on them as this undoubtedly will? David Bain may well be innocent, we need to set the record straight.

Raff Dellavaris
On the face of it, there is reasonable doubt as to whether David Bain committed the murders at all. Because of that, even if it goes to trial, the prosecution may have a hard time disproving the possibility that the father had committed the crimes.In a fair justice system you can't convict someone where there is reasonable doubt as to whether they committed a crime, despite the temptation to pin the blame on someone living.

Whanganui
David must be released on the basis of the Privy Council findings and yes this is justice working its the investigation one has no faith in.

Kiwi Lisa
If there's the least bit of doubt about a conviction any accused deserve a new trial. Because, in a democracy it's preferable to let a guilty go than throwing an innocent in jail. As simple as that.

Matthew
This is all fine and dandy, the police messed up, like they have before, this is nothing new. Its all very well to say the trial was unfair but who actually did it if not David? If anyone can actually answer that in a way that is inline with the evidence I will believe his innocence. Ok lets suppose that somehow the father managed to find the gun, rig up some contraption to shot himself in the back of the head, without getting any prints on the gun, lets assume that David somehow managed to get blood splatters all over himself without even being there. So the option remaining is that David found his father with a method to shoot himself in the back of the head. Suffice to say that if that is the case then he must have been lying anyway.... Somebody explain! In terms of the crown retrying David, well they are damned if they do and damned if they don't. If they don't, they will be seen as being wrong and therefore corrupt. If they do they will be accused of wasting taxpayers money. In terms of dropping the Privy Council... Well you asked for it. NZers are so keen at dropping ties with Britain.

Willy Foxton
Having the trial quashed by the Privy Council is ridiculous. The so called law Lords should look at the evidence If Robin Bain was the killer why would he make the evidence look as though David the only so called one who deserved to be left alive was the killer. Why would he wear gloves that were David's? Why would he wash his bloodied socks before committing suicide? Why were the only perfect prints found on the gun those of David Bains? Why was David Bains bloodied palm print found on the washing machine? The sooner we get rid of the Privy Council the better. I think they are having a passing shot at the NZ system by quashing the conviction.

John (Auckland)
Free David Bain now. Compensate him. No retrial. Investigate police stuff-up. Restore right to go to Privy Council.Thank you Joe Karam you have done our country a great service. Kia kaha!!

Lisa
I was delighted to hear the news. I have always believed that David was innocent. I hope he will not have to endure a re-trial and that he will be out on bail next week and start catching up on all those years he's missed.

Nelson
Sadly David Bain is the latest in a long list of trials with strong evidence that the police force is more interested in conviction than truth. Combined with the lack of integrity being exposed within the force and the cover-ups at all levels, there is reduced trust from the general public in the justice system. Thank goodness for Joe Karam and the overseas Judges and 13 years of perseverance. Some accountability must be sheeted home to those who deny us justice.

David is guilty as sin
I can believe some of the postings by people who think the decision means that David is innocent, have you people even read the decision? Try to explain to me how it could have been anyone other than David. How does Robin Bain shoot his whole family and himself and have no blood on his clothes while David's have blood all over them? Most of the key points from the Crown case against David are unaffected by the fresh evidence the Privy Council relied on.

Westie
Of course there should be a retrial and I am with Jono (below), on the verdict!

Murray (Auckland)
Oh good grief! How naive people are. The Privy Council has not said he is innocent - just that all the evidence was not presented. That is a big difference. People need to grow up and understand the law without sentiment! There is trend in these views that Robin involvement with his daughter is a fact and gives him a motive. At best, this is only heresy - there was never any proof of this at all. Nothing. Zero. Zilch.. People who say David had no motive - how do they make such a claim. A motive can be very hidden. There have been suggestions that he wanted out of dysfunctional family...that's a good motive as any, if not better than the one against Robin. Oh, and one other thing. The fact that he 'survived' is an good pointer that he is not innocent - not to mention the fingerprint, gun placement, no injuries on Robin when he should have fought with Stephen (David did though). Wake up, smell the roses. He is not the boy-next door people have been fooled to believe in.

Karl (Slovenia)
I have no opinion on if David or his father committed the crime. I feel that the trial that David did have consisted of incompetent forensic and detective police work set on concentrating all of their efforts on the only living suspect, as a dead suspect can't be trialled and a prosecution case that was dead set on focusing everything ounce of attention on David and away from his father. This left a possibly incompetent defence with one weak option of saying that "the prosecution case is wrong" and putting forward the Robin Bain 'alternative' case which followed the superior prosecution and didn't have numerous detectives working on it. I believe the case should have had a prosecution and defence for David and somehow a completely independent unbiased 3rd part where a full detailed enquiry of the Robin Bain alternative should have been shown to the Jury. But of course this is all in hindsight.

John (Dunedin)
David Bain should definitely be released. The Privy Council ruling makes it very clear that the Court of Appeal exceeded their brief in making a decision about guilt or innocence - something that the Privy Council believes should be left to a jury (provided the police can be trusted to provide objective evidence - which it appears they cannot). So, how can two judges who were on the Court of Appeal that got it so wrong, continue to sit on the Supreme Court? Clearly they should go.

Ken (Northland)
The Privy Council quashed David Bain's conviction but with a lot of the comments given here you would think they had proclaimed his innocence. A re- trial is the only option and he should be treated as any accused person would be until the re trial takes place. Either that or he serves out the rest of is sentence.

Auckland
Free David Bain with a full pardon and any means necessary to alleviate him of the unimaginable burden he's been forced to carry for 13 years. He should never have been convicted of the murders, he never even looked guilty of any of the convictions he was accused of. The NZ Police stuffed up and they should be accountable and ashamed of the results inflicted on this innocent man. Congratulations to his crusaders. What an incredible person and friend David has in Joe Karam.

AJ
The proceedings have already created confusion. The quashing of David's conviction does not imply innocence at all - simply that the legal process has not been followed accurately.
The cost to the taxpayer should be irrelevant in this case, regardless of innocence or guilt we have a man here who has grown up in a rather sinister family, has endured abuse no child should have to face and has not had the chance to function in this world as an adult. The New Zealand public deserves to know the truth. David Bain and his entire family deserve justice. It is highly unlikely that can happen in NZ given that anyone over the age of 25 has already formed an opinion as to what happened on that fateful day. Extreme caution needs to be exercised here - either we release a mass murderer - or an extremely troubled child, wrongly convicted who grew to manhood in a public jail surrounded by the most unsavoury our country has to offer - is either of these options one we want to support?

Moira
I have always believed that David Bain is innocent, and I seriously think that he should be freed so that he can get on with his life. He's had 13 years of his life unfairly taken from him just because he 'survived' this horrific tragedy. I personally believe that if the police had done their job properly right from the beginning, this innocent man would have been able to grieve normally for the loss of his loved ones instead of sitting in a prison fighting the system to try to prove his innocence.I personally do not have faith in the justice system. We see too many victims being let down by our system - it is so sad to see.

Nik
The Privy Council verdict is one of neutrality. The verdict against David has been quashed, may common sense prevail in the next step. Why was David arrested in the first place?Remember he came home from doing a paper run and found his family dead. How would you react to this finding? David rang the police...did he not..? When police arrived they found David in an incoherent state. How would you react if you came home and found all your family dead? Does this immediately make you the killer?

Mary (Canterbury)
The police decided DB was the killer, thats what people in the know said in the pre arrest days. Shame on Labour M.P.s for not standing up to Helen and therefore depriving us of the Privy Council. Judith Ablett Kerr tried her best in the Court of Appeal, but the judges got it wrong. The Privy Council has slapped the face of high ranking NZ Judiciary hard. They richly deserve it.

Mike Woods
The Justice system has been driven by the need for convictions rather than justice since the 1980's. They clearly decided early and ignored all evidence that did not fit their opinion. The incest revelations were obviously the motive. As for the haste in burning the house with the forensic evidence and giving the computer away, the mind boggles! Free him and look at how this miscarriage can be avoided in future. We need our confidence in the justice system and the Police's investigative integrity restored!

Hyphen
I'm happy to contribute my share of the taxpayers millions it cost to free David Bain. What is needed now is to identify those who manipulated the evidence for their own benefit. Then they should be given the same treatment and publicity.

Robyn (Auckland)
I've always thought that David Bain was innocent, and I've always felt that instead of looking at the evidence to find the right person, the police fit the evidence to convict David Bain - not the right way. Having the house burnt down to the ground so early on in the piece also made me very uneasy. David Bain should never have been found guilty in the first place. He should be let free now, based on the evidence that has been found, rather than having to sit through another lengthy costly trial, which wouldn't be fair for David, or the taxpayers.

Batman
I feel sorry for David Bain, he was subject from a quick arrest through public interest and was never given a fair trial, the police did a lousy job, I have followed this case for a long time, its obvious and even more obvious now he is innocent! Once again our justice system fails, this poor guy lost his entire family and then had it pinned on him as it was the easiest thing to do, I am appalled at the justice system and the NZ police. I am glad I dont live in NZ anymore .Let him go, give him a full pardon and a hefty compensation and leave him alone. The Government and the justice system owes it to him for all the pain and suffering they inflicted on him in the first place.

Gary
There has to be a retrial. Like the experts say(including the privy council), there is far too much doubt to say the least for there not to be one. Personally I'd say he is plain guilty from the evidence, plus the obvious fact that all his supporters are emotionally motivated and not looking at the facts of the case.Either way the New Zealand public deserve another full hearing to give any closure to the matter especially as to how its all been so publicly presented to us.

Will (Wellington)
Why does it have to be so black and white? Why does it have to be either only David did it or Robin did it? I tend to agree a previous comment that David found Robin strangling Stephen, they fought, then David chased him into the lounge and shot him. This seems more plausible than both the theories, and could explains David's behaviour immediately after...and since.

Michael Conforth
Yes I strongly agree that a miscarrage of justice has occurred and also that a retrial would not be in the best interest of the tax payer. Free Bain and let him live his life outside of the public eye.

WendyG
It makes me doubt the ability of finding true justice in the courts of NZ. The recent episodes of the police rape cases remind me that pertinent information can be suppressed in the courts. There appears to be some pertinent information about this case that was not disclosed at the time. So how can any jury make a true judgment if information pertaining to the character or possible motives is held back?

Chris Parsons
David Blain has had how many court cases in relation to this offence and how many does he expect to have, I'm sick of hearing about him. This is a good reason the death penalty should be reintroduced.

Kiwicafe
It's not the Public who need a clear verdict, surely it is David Bain himself. Enough is enough.

Peter (Te Anau)
No confidence whatsoever in or justice system. Why didn't our Appeal Court ever question in some way the Bain case. The justice system is just like the military. You do the time, stay out of trouble, you get promoted. Hence our Supreme Court will always be a just an extension of our lower courts. The highest court in the land should be both free of judicial and political interference. Pity the next person where evidence is withheld in the interests of winning.

Paul
I think that David Bain should be granted bail while the great debate over a possible retrial continues. Clearly there are some major issues with the case and the investigation (or lack of it)to raise enough doubt for the Law Lords of the Privy Council to be able to make such a finding. Can the country afford to spend millions on a retrial that could go on for another 13 years? A retrial and a not guilty verdict will give David Bain a huge multi million dollar payout, What's it to be?

Richard
It seems to me that the New Zealand Police are incapable of dealing with major cases. It seems to me, as I look back over the years there has been a few major cases, where the police have screwed up the investigations, and I cannot help but wonder how many of the people involved in major crimes are in fact innocent. Not long ago there was a story that a book was to be released that claims that Scott Watson was also framed and not guilty for his crime. Are we to have faith in the New Zealand Police when so many major crimes, and some minor crimes those convicted have latter been found to of not done the crime? There needs to be some serious investigations into how the NZ police force investigate crimes, because I see little reason to have any faith in the police force.

H Dare
First David Bain and next Ellis, Scott Watson and Lundy. All 4 were miscarriages of justice. We may have a legal system but we don't have a justice system.

Anna
David Bain should be freed and also paid a large amount of compensation.

Concerned Citizen
I am relieved that David Bain's conviction has been quashed and I hope that he gets the justice due him - freedom and a pardon exonerating him from the crimes he was accused of committing. Very tragic case.

James Gollan
New Zealand must reinstate the Privy Council as our last Court of Appeal. We have too small a population to draw upon to ensure a totally unbiased court. With police corruption rife within NZ it is essential that we have a totally neutral final court.

Jimmy
I don't know whether David is guilty or not, and I don't care. But it would be interesting to see if this case does go to re-trial, this time with all of the evidence before the court. If there is sufficient doubt over David's guilt (and there seems to be) then he will be acquitted, making a case for compensation all the more stronger. I would like to see it go to re-trial for that reason. On the other hand, the police don't deserve a second bite at the cherry, as it were, because of the selectivity and the mishandling of evidence the first time around. How the heck does the house (the crime scene) get burned down only days after the murders? And finally, the Court of Appeal got slapped big time.

David
How hard would it be for the police to spend a little longer to get the case right, if they had spent a little more time working on the case, none of this would have happened. Look at the cost it is going to be on the taxpayer. David Bain has every right to reclaim his costs, along with every one who fought for his freedom. The bill will be huge. Add on the cost of keeping him in prison for 12 years, paying all of the judges and lawyers. How hard is it for the police to think things through on a case and see the long term effect. The system needs a shake up, heads need to roll over this, how can we rely on a system that sets up the innocent and sets free the guilty. The sad thing is that I bet the police will get a pay raise and a pat on the back. The old guard must fall. I want to see people made accountable for what they have done. There needs to be more independent bodies in cases not less, in the states they have a FBI, and what do we have? Let the man go, start a case for gross waste of government money.

Auckland
A lot of emotional nonsense has been aired by commentators here. Mike (Dunedin) is on the button. No one has denied that Robin Bain, the father, was shot in the back of his head with a rifle. Anyone with knowledge of firearms would know that it is impossible to commit suicide in this manner. David Bain was found guilty by a High Court jury and two courts of Appeal. In this case, the justice system was right.

Michelle
Get David Bain out, compensate him, - and may heads roll for those who decided that it was easier to assume than fully investigate - his compensation should come out of their pockets.

Kay
It seems clear that, had all the evidence been heard, there was 'reasonable doubt' in the Bain case (even to the legally illiterate public). NZ law says that's enough for him to be free. Shame the 'system' takes so long to work through. The true hero here is the loyal Joe Karam because right or wrong, he believed and put it all on the line for that. So Bain should be free now and Karam should be vindicated and both recompensed.

Alan Wilkinson
Not for the first time Professor Optican's views are totally unconvincing. Whether or not the public "needs to know whether David Bain is guilty or not guilty", it is unlikely that can ever be determined so long after the event and with so much of the prosecution evidence now clouded. A retrial jury will inevitably be unable to agree on a guilty verdict and will be hung or will acquit. The public view will almost certainly be that a retrial is a waste of time and money. Rather the public concern is why a succession of Court of Appeal decisions have been overturned, why senior criminal lawyers have no confidence in our Court of Appeal and whether the Supreme Court will perform any better in rectifying miscarriages of justice. The question is indeed how New Zealand can have an independent and assertive authority tasked with challenging judicial errors in the absence of the Privy Council. Professor Optican might have some basis for excusing the serious questions the Privy Council decision has raised about the competence of our senior appellant courts had this been a rare example. Unfortunately it is not.

Order a retrial
Some of you reckon that because the Privy Council disagreed with the Court of appeal, we should return to having the PC as our highest court. We shouldn't because: The PC has decided that there's no reason for thinking the jury considered certain points, and therefore the CA shouldn't have considered them. The PC has decided this even though (a) the prosecutor mentioned these points at trial, and (b) the trial judge mentioned them in summing up. Hmmm. Some of these comments seem to be based on the assumption that the ordering of a retrial means that Bain is innocent. Well, the PC itself says that no appeal court can decide whether or not Bain is guilty. Some other people seem to think that this case, the Ellis case, the Watson case, etc, all add up to a corrupt or incompetent NZ justice system. Now, people say Ellis should be pardoned because he was the victim of a sexual abuse witchhunt. But the same people say that Robin Bain must be guilty because his daughter, known to have lied about similar things, allegedly said he sexually abused her. Hmmm. David Bain's fingerprints were on the gun, and his family's blood was on his clothes. Hmmm.

Auckland
I have followed this case and never thought he was guilty for one moment. Fantastic and what a man Joe Karem is - David has been so very lucky to have him. But how about Scott Watson - another man inside for nothing, apart from being a bad boy, but definitely not a murderer. Helen Clark's government needs to rethink her decision on NZ and the Privy Council smart quick, we are far too small a country.

Bentcops
I am stoked, another huge slap in the face for the cops.

Smitty
Gone are the days where a man is innocent until proven guilty. The police do not look for evidence to find a man guilty yet they place their efforts on a guilty until proven innocent basis. This is passed down through the prosecution to the courts where the terms Innocent has no real meaning in New Zealand. How dare the courts say they are still considering whether to re-try the man!. On what basis I ask?

Grant Diggle
The decision of the Judical Committee of the Privy Council in this case highlights the error of Helen Clark and Margaret Wilson who were behind the move to abolish appeals to this Court. Alas the NZ judicary does not have the breadth and depth of the panel of eminent Law Lords who sit on the Committee. Yet again our Court of Appeal has been found wanting. This is of major concern as some of the jurists whose decisions in that Court were overturned now sit on the Supreme Court and it is not the first time they have been overruled. The citizens must now question whether they can have faith in people whose abilities to dispense justice has been declared inadequate.

Barb (Dunedin)
Mr Joe Karam, I thank you for everything you have done in getting the truth finally out there for all to see. I have never, ever, thought David was guilty and have had belief that if anyone could prove otherwise, it was you. I have cried all day and keep re-reading the privy councils outcome, just to know I'm not dreaming it. We, as a country, owe David Bain so much.

Katie, Christchurch
In my view, there are still far too many things that point to David as the killer to just let him walk free. The supposed "revelation of incest" as a motive for the father to kill the family is completely unreliable. Laniet Bain had also claimed she had a baby as a young teenager when the family lived in PNG and that was shown to be a complete fabrication. The family was odd to say the least, including David. The majority of the extended Bain family believe David to be guilty, and Robin innocent, and they knew them best. A retrial would at least get all the evidence before a jury and would, one way or another, settle the matter. Clearly from the amount of debate that's going on, it would absolutely be "in the public interest."

Matthew Pilott
I hope Bain gets a re-trial, otherwise he will be assumed to be guilty by many people (the case is polarising, but many consider him guilty). A re-trial will be the only way to exonerate Bain, based upon new evidence and destroying the case against him, if it was in fact so inept an investigation.As for the Privy council, Bain was indeed lucky that he got to have his case heard by the PC. Few people would have the means to get a case heard there. We're lucky we've got a supreme court in NZ, and those with the vision to set it up.

Rex (Panmure)
There should be no further trial. The Privy Council has decided David Bain suffered a miscarriage of justice, and in the circumstances now, there will always remain a doubt about his guilt. He should be given immediate bail, and consideration given to a pardon and compensation for the 12 years of imprisonment he should not have served.

Wendy
To Roy, there is never a good reason or motive for one to kill their family...the only thing needed is madness!

Eggy
Guilty as charged, bring back capital punishment. He looks like a weirdo.

Amie (Aussie)
I now live in Australia, but was in Dunedin when this tragedy occurred. I have never not even for one second, considered the maniacal notion that David is guilty. I would love to send him a personal congratulation (if someone knows how - please let me know). The law is a farce, it is completely obvious that the police just wanted to arrest someone as quickly as possible and picked on the last remaining member of the family to get this problem out of the way. The evidence against him was circumstancial at best. I, and my whole family, think he should never has spent one day in jail, let alone all these years.I hope it he gets millions and millions of dollars in compensation!

Blinded
Someone wearing a jumper like that should be guilty of something?. Is there no justice?'

SB(Christchurch)
What the Privy Council decision means is that David Bain is now innocent until proven guilty (in a retrial if it goes ahead). He doesn't have to prove his innocence, the Crown must prove his guilt. Congratulations David Bain and your loyal team, I hope you get the justice you deserve.

Rachel (Dunedin)
It is with deep concern and astonishment that I listen to and read, both public opinion and media reporting, regarding David Bain's legal proceedings. Especially a comment made by Mr Karam saying, "...now that the charges have been dropped, David should be freed immediately". I implore the public to read the report from the Privy Council stating reasons for the decisions and what it actually means. Quashed means invalid or dismissed, not found innocent, hence the ordering of a retrial. Also, The Board has stated that David Bain should remain in custody during the deliberations regarding if or when the recommended retrial be conducted. With all these points to consider, how can members of the public suggest that David Bain should be released, either on bail or because they have interpreted The Privy Council's decision as a finding of innocence. Furthermore, how has this turned into yet another Police persecution. The house was not burned down by the Police "two days after", as is being perpetuated, rather it was after sentencing, considerable months later and at the request of the extended family.

Judy (Kaitaia)
I am not convinced that David Bain is innocent but I think it is too late for a retrial to prove whether he is guilty. He should therefore be released from prison but as a trade-off not given monetary compensation.

Peter (Eden Terrace)
It's hard to sit and judge the events that occurred that morning in Dunedin 13 years on. I have always believed David to be innocent. It has come to light since that morning that Robin had a great deal of motivation. The potential exposure of his sexual dealings with his daughter, and the fact he appeared totally estranged from his family, living at the rear of the property in a caravan. As a man of some (albeit slight) standing in the community, such events could turn an already unbalanced man into a ruthless killer. No one really knows what goes on in the human mind, an outwardly ordinary person can have real demons within them, which lay dormant, till one day they are set free. I sit on the fence, but am leaning extremely heavily to the side or David Bain's innocence.

No name given
David Bain should be set free. We have no faith whatsoever in the Justice system. It is all too easy for counsel to withhold vital supporting evidence from juries. Why should a counsel get away with deliberately not following his client's instruction? Why does the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court support the lawyer when this happens? How does our system allow this to happen? Bring back the Privy Council.

Shona Bull
Congratulations to Joe Karam & Michael Reed. Our hearts go out to David Bain. NZ prisons contain many innocent victims who did not receive a fair trial and whose supporting evidence has been deliberately withheld from juries. Justice must be sought and a fair trial guaranteed in all cases. Bring back the Privy Council.

Mike (Hamilton)
Why do people keep referring to the Thomas case, that was a totally different set of circumstances, Thomas should and was found guilty on the evidence produced, but the evidence was planted, this is not the case with Bain, there is no planted evidence.

Bloke (Koke)
In the light of this case we need an urgent, independent and authoritative review of the entire legal/judicial system. Suggestions: an independent prosecution service, a ban on police comment once charges have been laid, a thorough review of the rules of evidence, full disclosure of prosecution evidence to the defence and a court of last appeal with independence from the tiny coterie of judicial expertise available here.

Mick Cane
In any other