David Bain is in the news again; the Herald reports:
A confidential report on David Bain's claim for wrongful imprisonment concludes he is innocent of murdering his parents, brother and two sisters and recommends the Government pay him compensation.The case, which has divided New Zealand at every step, promises to do so again as the Cabinet decides whether to pay Mr Bain.He could be looking at a payout of close to $2 million for non-pecuniary losses such as liberty and emotional harm, and more for pecuniary losses such as loss of livelihood, in compensation for the almost 13 years he spent in prison.Those figures are based on the formula the Cabinet used for non-pecuniary losses in its last compensation payment, made in April last year.But compensation is by no means certain and the Government has no obligation to pay it.Mr Bain was described as "penniless" by his lawyer, Michael Reed, QC, when the application for compensation was lodged in March 2010.Most legal experts at the time thought Mr Bain would find it difficult to meet the criteria for a compensation payment.Last week, Justice Minister Judith Collins said she had received the report of retired Canadian Supreme Court judge Ian Binnie and would meet him about it soon.She said she would not release his report until the Cabinet decided whether to pay compensationBut the Herald has learned Justice Binnie believes that on the balance of probabilities, Mr Bain is innocent.
The burning question this morning now seems to be this; who has leaked the contents of Justice Ian Binnie's report to the media?
To answer that, we pose another question; who has a vested interest in the David Bain case? And has a copy of the report been sent to Bain's legal team? If that is the case, we wonder if that is suspicion rests.
8 comments:
One does not have to be Einstein to work out that the report finds David Bain innocent. If you follow the flow chart on the MOJ website regarding compensation claims, you will see the process only goes to cabinet if the findings require compensation (i.e. the claimant is innocent of the offence/s).
Most people worked it out as soon as the statement was made it was being referred to cabinet.
It is good to know that 'witch sniffing' is still alive and kicking in our country though.
Thanks for that Susanna. To be fair, there wasn't a lot of comment to that effect when it was announced last week that Justice Binnie's report had gone to the Minister.
As for "witch sniffing", the Herald notes that this likely decision will again polarise New Zealand. It needs to be expected that there are as many people who feel that David Bain got lucky with the second verdict as believe that justice has been done.
Just because the process is that cabinet is the next decision-making step, it doesn't automatically follow that the report will be released to the public before the Minister has shown it to Cabinet and they've had a chance to discuss the implications of a "guilty" verdict.
Frankly it beggars belief that anyone with two braincells to rub together, could conclude that DB wasn't guilty on BRD, never mind the balance of probability.
Who leaked the report?
The Greens, of course!
I know of a political journalist sniffing around the issue right now.
Watch this space!
Susanna was onto it in post 1. The situation is clear to follow from the flow chart, but for those that understood the evidence even easier. Judith Collins revealed the information a week ago for those that wanted to look behind her press release and at the procedures. If he wasn't considered innocent by Binnie he would have received a letter declining the application and the recommendation would have been forwarded to Cabinet through the Minister. A lot of 'bright' lawyers suddenly look like dullards to me.
Joe was boasting that he was the lead lawyer himself (on Hoskings)and spent considerable time with Binnie.
Who leaked the report ? Well I think devious Joe could tell you that.
I would certainly not discount that possibility Baxter. I heard Karam on the radio this morning saying that they had "overwhelming evidence" as to Bain's innocence. If by that Joe was meaning his books on the subject, then I'm completely underwhelmed!
I thought you might have had the backbone to apologise by now Keeping Stock but I see you're still looking to blame others because you've been proved wrong. Good luck with that.
Suggesting that Karam leaked the report or influenced it unduly contradicts your own site rules!
Post a Comment