The Bain Family Murders

David Bain has become a household name here in New Zealand, and The Bain family killings is one of our most talked about true crime cases. And, alot of people still wonder "Who did it?". 

Was it the dad, 'Robin,'..

Did he kill his wife and three teenage kids before taking his own life, or was it the eldest son, David, who killed everyone?

People talk about how quirky and dysfunctional the Bain family were. Basically, their home was super messy and they were considered to be a bit odd.

Margaret, (the mum) was really religious, and was fully committed to New Age concepts, like previous lives and channelling. She was also using a key ring as a pendulum to tell her what God wanted her to do, even for such mundane things like shopping. 

Robin Bain (the Dad) was said to not believe in what his wife believed in and was powerless and basically just tolerated her behavior.

Apparently Robin told a friend about the filthy state of his house and that Margaret was away with the fairies. 

Some people also point out how strange the oldest son 'David' was. David, being the sole survivor of the massacre. Apparently he was weirdly jealous of his sister (Laniet's) relationships. (There has been talk about incest in the media within the Bain family, but I don't know if it's true). All I know is that David was a bit strange. 

Also, people forget that 3 innocent teenage children were killed in their own home while they lay asleep in their beds. They should have been safe in their own home!

Our homes and especially our bedrooms are like our sanctuary right? 

So, I want to take a moment to remember these kids that lost their lives. Because, this story became all about David! And, less about the victims in my opinion. They were shot at point-blank range by someone they most likely knew and trusted. It's so sad.

I do have my own opinion on the case, but I'll leave that til the end.

Now, let's go back to 1969 when Robin Bain married Margaret Cullen in Dunedin, here in New Zealand. The couple had met through the church they both attended, and Robin was eight years older than Margaret. After Robin and Margaret got married, they had four children. Their oldest son, David, was born in 1972, followed by Arawa two years later. Laniet arrived in 1976, and the youngest child, Stephen, was born in 1980.

The Bain family relocated from New Zealand to Papua New Guinea in 1974, and while living in Papua New Guinea, Robin worked as a missionary. After 14 years in Papua New Guinea, the Bain family returned to New Zealand. When they returned to New Zealand from Papua New Guinea, Robin was hired as the principal of the local School. 

Margaret, the matriarch of the Bain family, was raised in a religious Presbyterian family, and she was very active in her church community and she was a youth group leader. However, despite Margaret's dedication to her Christian faith, she had a genuine interest in exploring and learning about different religions. Margaret went to Otago University, where she decided to pursue anthropology, a field that allowed her to delve deeper into the cultures and beliefs of people around the world. Robin, who also had a keen interest in exploring various religions, shared this interest. They would often read books together, and one book that particularly resonated with them was The Prophet. This book was published in 1923, and emphasized the fundamental unity of all religions and advocated for tolerance and understanding. In their free time, Robin and Margaret would lay in bed and immerse themselves in the thought-provoking words of the book. They appreciated the insights and wisdom gained from the book, which challenged them to broaden their perspectives and embrace diversity within the spiritual realm.

When the Bain family moved from New Zealand to Papua New Guinea, Margaret's exposure to various belief systems expanded even further. Margaret, who had previously shown interest in different cultures during her university years, had the opportunity to visit and engage with the tribes she had read about. Moving to Papua New Guinea allowed Margaret to fully immerse herself in the local culture and embrace the beliefs and traditional healing practices practiced by the people there. And, when the family eventually returned to New Zealand in 1988, Margaret's spiritual journey continued to evolve. 

She fully embraced New Age concepts and started to believe in past lives. Margaret began analyzing her dreams and interpreting them as messages from a higher power. To support her newfound beliefs, Margaret even utilized a key ring as a pendulum. (Like I said before). She believed that this key ring, when gently held, could act as a means of communication with the divine. And, Margaret relied on this key ring to guide her decision-making, even for mundane tasks such as shopping. And, although Robin disapproved of his wife's views, he was tolerant of her. 

Also, after Margaret returned to Dunedin, she tried to recruit her friends into a voodoo cult. Margaret was under the belief that a satanic influence was inside her home, her children, and especially her husband. She was so full on with this belief that her husband had this Satanic influence inside him, that if Robin touched the newspaper before Margaret, she needed to clear it before she would touch it. Also, Margaret would clear the air of any part of the house Robin would go into.. It was getting a bit over the top to say the least. She was terrified that this satanic entity was talking through Robin and using him to get at her. This sounds a but like schizophrenia right?

I'm not qualified, but it sounds like she may have had schizophrenia. People back then just thought she was a bit weird or crazy.. But, it does sound like there was something else going on that she most likely needed treatment for.

Anyway, moving on..

So, out of all the children, David was the closest with his mother. He was a mamma's boy!. And, he made it his mission to please her. David also let his mother perform hypnosis on him, allowing her to cleanse him of any satanic influence. Also, around this time, things took a turn for the worse between Margaret and Robin. The relationship between them was real bad! They argued so much and Robin eventually moved out of the family home and into a caravan on the property.

Robin also started living at the school where he worked during the week. But, he still came home on the weekends and despite his living arrangements, Robin was still present in the home. And, he would occasionally grab the morning newspaper and carry it inside to read at the dining table. During this period, while Robin was away at work and living in the caravan, David took on the responsibilities of the man of the house.

The Bain family home was in disrepair both inside and out. The outside was neglected and unkempt, while the inside was equally shabby. Their property was cluttered with items gathered by Robin and Margaret during their years living in Papua New Guinea, and despite the city's repeated citations for maintaining the cleanliness and orderliness of the property, the Bain family lacked the resources necessary to upkeep their home.

Also by 1994, David had a job as a paper boy. This will become important later! At the time, David was at Otago University. David was not the brightest student, but he enjoyed opera and studied music at university. However, things were not going the best for him at this point. He was 22 years old, working on a newspaper route, (which is seen as a child's job), and living at home with his mother, who was obsessed with religion, in an unkempt and hoarded house. David's employment situation had been challenging for him, and he struggled to find a stable job. 

Honestly, who cares if you do a paper run! It's honest money right? Got to earn somehow.

So, David had been unemployed for an extended period before securing his

newspaper route. But, this job was low-paying and physically demanding, requiring him to deliver newspapers early in the morning. 

That would suck, but you gotta do what's handed to you right. And, David accepted that he needed the job to provide for himself and his family. Also, living at home with his mother was a struggle for David. His mother's obsession with religion had consumed every aspect of their lives. The house was cluttered with religious paraphernalia, and conversations were often centered around religious topics.

At 22 years old, David felt trapped and unfulfilled. Working on a newspaper

route and living in an unkempt house with his mother was not the life he had envisioned for himself. He longed for stability and independence.

Then, on June 20th 1994, David Bain woke up and began his day as usual. He prepared for his newspaper run, and at around 6:45 AM, a neighbor claimed they saw David outside his own home, walking towards the front door. This sighting raised suspicions and fueled speculation about what happened at the house later in the investigation. About 23 minutes after David arrived home, he called 111, New Zealand's version of 911, at 7:09 AM. And, in a heartbreaking call, he informed the dispatcher that.. "they're all dead. 

The dispatcher immediately sent police officers and paramedics to the Bain residence. And, just after 7:30 AM, police officers and paramedics arrived at the Bain residence. They found David in a fetal position, crying hysterically, and he did not reply to the officers or medics. He was apparently far to distraught. Upon entering the house, the officers discovered the bodies of all five members of the Bain family: 58-year-old Robin, 50-year-old Margaret, and three of their children, 19-year-old Arawa, 18-year-old Laniet, and 14-year-old Stephen.

Each victim had been fatally shot with a .22 caliber rifle, and a silencer was attached. This weapon was found beside Robin. And, the crime scene initially presented the appearance of a murder-suicide. This impression was reinforced after investigators discovered a typed note on the family computer.

The note said:

"Sorry, you are the only one who deserved to stay." 

To the detectives, it appeared that Robin had shot and killed his wife, daughters, and youngest son while his oldest son, David, was out of the house. And upon questioning David, he provided details regarding his morning. According to his story, after returning from his morning paper route, he went to do the laundry. However, instead of simply washing his dirty clothes, he bundled all the items waiting in the laundry basket into the washing machine. David claimed that he did not find the bodies until after he had finished doing his laundry. And, after discovering the tragic scene, he called 111 for help.

So, as crime scene investigators searched the Bain family home, they found a bloody clothing item in the laundry room. 

The laundry room was stained with blood, and bloody fingerprints were visible on the washing machine and soap box. Investigators also discovered a palm print made in blood, which they had preserved as potential evidence. Inside the laundry room, one of the bloodiest items discovered was a sweater or that belonged to David. However, David claimed he sometimes allowed his father and sisters to borrow the shirt. There was a significant amount of blood stained on it, leading investigators to believe that whoever shot and killed the Bain family had been wearing it at the time of the incident. 

The investigators also examined the rifle, which David claimed belonged to him. Upon closer examination, they found prints made in blood on the gun, which had also been preserved for comparison. And, in the immediate vicinity of the bodies, the investigators observed what seemed to be a trail of bloody footprints. These footprints were measured and photographed for evidence. The bloody palm print discovered in the laundry room was a match to David Bain. When questioned, David did admit to

doing laundry upon returning home from his paper route. To the detectives, it was plausible that David could have picked up the bloody clothing without noticing it when he was doing his wash. There were also specks of blood found on Robins's hands. However, the amount of blood found was not on the scale they had expected to determine if Robin had indeed pulled the trigger.

Ok... I'm putting my opinion in!

From what I have read, Robin and David didn't have a very good relationship, and Robin actually favored his daughter Laniet. So, why would he type up a note saying 'David was the only one who deserved to live.. basically'. Also, I also read that Robin wasn't the best with technology. So, why would he choose to type the note? Wouldn't an old school fella like Robin write the note instead? Unless, of course it wasn't Robin who did this and instead it was David and he was trying to frame his Dad.

David hasn't spoken very nicely about his Dad after all this, so I can see it being possible that David killed his family and framed his dad. Additionally, the bloody fingerprints on the rifle were found to be a match for David.

So, as the investigators continued their search in the Bain family home, they focused their attention on the bedroom of 14-year-old Stephen, where the teenager had been killed. There were signs of a struggle. And Steven had fought for his life. But, doesnt this seem a bit off to you??

Considering his father 'Robin' was an older and frail man. If Robin had been the shooter, one would expect Stephen to have been able to overpower him. Stephen had been strangled with a pillowcase and was almost scalped before being shot.

Also, inside Steven's bedroom investigators found a lens from a pair of glasses and the glasses were found in David's bedroom, which raised suspicions among the detectives. Looks like David may have been Steven's attacker and his glasses broke in the scuffle. And this is when Detectives began to question whether David was the person who had killed his family. 

Also, inside Stephen's bedroom, investigators discovered a pair of white gloves soaked with blood underneath his bed. The investigators believed that the gloves were worn by the shooter. They believe that the shooter removed the gloves in order to remove a

round that had become jammed in the rifle, and then the gloves got lost under the bed during the fight. These gloves were reportedly taken from a drawer in David's room. Investigators also found a similar pair of white gloves in the caravan where Robin slept. This discovery raised several questions among the investigators. They wondered why Robin would have decided to use David's gloves instead of his own during the shooting if indeed Robin was the shooter.

Additionally, if Robin had planned to take his own life after committing the murders, why wear gloves at all? There would have been no reason for him to cover up his fingerprints.

So, during the autopsy of the deceased members of the Bain family, the medical examiner determined Robin had a full bladder. 

This discovery puzzled the detectives, as it seemed to contradict their understanding of the events surrounding the case. 

Why would Robin wake up, ignore the urge to urinate, and then go on a shooting spree, killing members of his family before taking his own life?

Detectives believed that it would have been impossible for Robin to resist the urge to pee as he woke up. 

The human body has a built-in mechanism that signals the need to relieve itself upon waking. Therefore, they found it difficult to comprehend how Robin could carry out such a violent act with a full bladder. Furthermore, the detectives wondered how Robin could engage in the struggle with his youngest son, write a goodbye note on the computer, and finally shoot himself, all while carrying a full bladder. It seemed like an improbable scenario, raising questions about what happened during the tragic events.

The detectives believed that Robin woke up in the caravan. From there, he entered the home and went to the lounge, where he frequently prayed. It was in this location where Robin encountered the killer and was shot and killed. When the detectives questioned David, he claimed that when he went into Laniet's room after returning from his paper route, he found her and heard gurgling noises coming from her. However, the medical examiner determined that Laniet would have died instantly after the second or third shot to her head, which means in order for David to have heard gurgling, he would have had to be present when Laniet took her final breaths. Meaning, he was likely the killer or with the killer.

After the discovery of his family's dead bodies, David called 111 to report the incident. 

Four days later, he was charged with five counts of murder. Two weeks after the murders, the Bain family home was burned down at the request of relatives.

Then in May of 1995, David Bain went on trial at the Dunedin High Court. 

The Prosecution Theory is that David woke up, got dressed, and then went to his wardrobe to get his .22 rifle. Then he went to his closet to get his gun and attached its silencer and loaded the magazine. 

Then they say he put on a pair of white gloves and wore his mother's glasses because his own glasses were being repaired.

Then he went to Laniet's room, where he shot her twice in the head as she lay sleeping. 

Then, he went to his mother's room and shoots her in the forehead. In the room off his mother's, he finds Stephen asleep. He puts the rifle to his head, but Stephen woke up and pushed it away, but it went off and shit through Steven's hand. There is a struggle with Stephen as he fights for his life. 

The prosecution say that David twisted Stephen's T-shirt to strangle him and as he lay on the floor gasping, David finished him off with a bullet to the head.

So, in some articles they say a pillow case and in others it's a t-shirt.. I don't know for certain if it's a tshirt or pillow case, so I'll just say what is said throughout the case.

Ok, so during the struggle, David’s glasses fell off. He turns on the light and picks them up leaving one of the lenses on the floor and carries them back to his bedroom and places them on his chair.

He goes downstairs where his sister Arawa has heard the shots. 

They say she was praying and was kneeling as David entered the room and he shot.

But, he apparently missed because he can't see very well without his glasses.

He shoots again and this time is successful. Arawa was shot in the forehead. 

Then, he goes back upstairs where he hears Laniet gurgling and he shoots her again in the top of the head.

Then, David throws his bloodied clothing into the washing machine and turns it on. 

David's father Robin is still asleep at this point in the caravan, and David puts on a fresh set of clothes and goes out with his dog Casey, to do his Otago Daily Times paper run.

Returning home, he goes into the lounge and turns the computer on. 

He types in the suicide message (framing his dad). 

The note that says: 'Sorry, you are the only one who deserved to stay'. 

David then hides behind the curtain with the rifle and waits for his father to come in to pray. 

Apparently it was a daily routine of Robins to pray in the morning. Robin enters the room and kneels on the other side of the curtains. David shoots his father in the head and left the rifle beside his body, then David dialed 111.

Ok, now the defense theory.

So, if David is not responsible, then there seems to be only one other possibility, and during the early stages of the investigation, it was believed that Robin Bain may have killed his family before taking his own life. And some people argue that there is strong evidence to support this theory. Its said that Laniet had returned home that weekend to confront her parents about her dad SA'ing her.

Robin could have faced serious criminal charges if it turned out that he did SA his daughter, and some people think that maybe Robin thought that Laniet was going to report him to the police, and that this was enough motive to kill his family.

It was also known that Robin's marriage to Margaret was pretty much over. He spent the week living at the school and the weekends in a rundown trailer in the backyard of the family home.

Additionally, the test to check for gunpowder residue, which could show if someone had recently fired a gun, wasn't performed on Robin until five hours after the police arrived. 

This delay might have made the test inconclusive because residue can disappear within hours of a shooting. Also, the tests were carried out at the mortuary after the body had been moved without protecting his hands, instead of being done at the scene.

So, both the prosecution and defense refrained from presenting a motive during the trial. 

Also, a guy called Dean Cottle, (a witness for the defense), was expected to testify that David's sister Laniet was going to expose an incestuous relationship between her father. However, Dean Cottle failed to show up during the trial, leaving the defense without the necessary evidence to support the claims. Dean Cottle did write a statement and provided it for the court, but the judge determined that he was an unreliable witness and ruled against the admission of his testimony. This decision had a significant impact on the outcome of the trial, because it prevented the jurors from considering this possible motive as to why Robin might have wanted to kill his family and himself.

So, during the trial, the Crown alleged that David had marks on his face that looked as if they could have occurred during a struggle. When questioned by the detectives, David failed to explain these injuries. Additionally, when the detectives asked David to change out of his clothing after his arrest at the police station and put on prison-issued attire, they discovered more scratches on his chest. The Crown informed the jury that Robin, who the defense claimed shot and killed the family, had no injuries on his body except for the one gunshot wound to the head. And, because Stephen fought back so fiercely, the Crown said they expected the family's killer to be covered in wounds.

Also, at the crime scene, there were bloody footprints that appeared to be made by someone wearing socks. 

However, Robin, who the defense alleged was the shooter, did not have any blood on his socks. And in fact, Robin was wearing boots at the time of his death. 

The defense claimed that Robin was walking through the house with blood-soaked socks but later changed his footwear before taking his own life.

These bloody prints were measured and found to be between 280 mm and 290mm long. 

During the trial, the defense conducted an experiment involving

people wearing socks and saturating them with pig's blood. These individuals were instructed to step firmly on a carpet, leaving behind a print. However, the print they left behind was larger than their actual foot size. The defense argued that this discrepancy in the print size proved that Robin was the shooter. They reasoned that Robin's actual shoe size was 227 mm, but the prints of the shooter were estimated to be between 280 and 290 mm. According to the defense, this indicated that Robin must have left the footprints found at the crime scene.

On the other hand, the Crown argued that the defense's experiment was flawed and unreliable. They argued that it was not possible to accurately determine the

size and shape of the print left behind by the individuals wearing socks soaked in pig's blood.

Also, at David's trial, the Crown alleged that a .22 caliber rifle was too big for Robin to use to take his own life. However, the defense presented a demonstration that showed how a person could take their own life by placing the rifle butt on the ground or chair and then holding the barrel against their head while pulling the trigger with the other hand. Although the position appeared unnatural, it was possible. So, they say that Robin chose an unusual way to take his own life.

Basically by placing the rifle muzzle against his left temple on a strange angle. Thing is, some of his blood was on the curtains that were a long way from where his body was found. And the spare 10-shot magazine just happened to land on its narrowest edge, right by his right hand.

Make it make sense!

Imprints were observed on Robin's hand, which the defense claimed

could have been made by the magazine. This magazine had dimples, and the

defense argued that these indentations were consistent with Robin's hand gripping or shoving it into the weapon. I've seen pictures if Robin's hand, and honestly the mark could be anything. It kind of looks like a papercut to me.

One other thing I find interesting. If Robin did this crime, then why wasn't a single fingerprint belonging to him found on the murder weapon?

Make it make sense!

Ahh, probably because he didn't kill his family and he himself is a victim who has had his name dragged through the mud here in New Zealand. There's no coming back from it, even if David did admit one day that he killed his family, because the damage is already done.

So, during the trial, the Crown raised several questions about Robin's typed note.

Firstly, they questioned why an educated man, an English major, and a school principal had written such a poorly constructed note. The prosecution believed that this inconsistency in Robin's writing skills was indicative of someone else's involvement. Secondly, the Crown highlighted that it would have been time-consuming for

Robin to turn on the computer and wait for it to boot up before he could type the note.

The Crown asked why he decided to wait until that time to write a suicide note when he could have easily written it down by hand. The Crown argued that David, not Robin, wrote the note. They believed that David would not be able to stage a suicide note by hand because his handwriting did not match his father's and would be easily proven. The note and Robin's behavior made them think David wrote it. Also, they said there was no proof that if Robin was the killer and he was going to spare one of his children that it would have been David. Because, David and his father didn't get along, which was confirmed by several witnesses.

So the jury went away and after deliberations, they found David Bain guilty on five counts of murder.

David then received a life sentence with a 16 year non parole period and off he went to prison. David later described how he felt when he was served cold fish and chips and shown to his cell on that Friday evening in June 1995. David said that he cried himself to sleep and had a very restless night. He also shared that he desperately tried to attend his family's funeral but was not allowed to by the police and his relatives. David expressed the ongoing pain of being denied the chance to say goodbye to his family.

One Year after David was found guilty of killing his family, his story caught the attention of Joe Karam. Joe was a rugby player and prominent figure in the community. So, Joe read a news article about a university student raising money for David's defense by selling jam, and Joe was intrigued by what he was reading. This is when he decided to investigate the case further, and after reading about the case he decided that he wanted to fight for justice for David Bain.

Joe Karam thought that David was innocent, and he embarked on a lengthy

campaign to overturn David's conviction. He dedicated countless hours to

researching and gathering evidence. He was determined to prove that David was innocent, and during David's incarceration, Joe would visit him regularly. In addition to his visits, Joe wrote 4 books about the murders and the case. Joe was getting supporters for David's case and encouraged others to question the validity of his conviction. Joe worked tirelessly on David's case, dedicating his full-time efforts to this cause. He poured his heart and soul into researching and gathering information, utilizing his connections and resources to uncover any leads or evidence that might support David's defense.

Remember, this guy had connections.

Joe was super wealthy and pretty much a celebrity here in New Zealand. He owned over 20 investment properties, but he decided to sacrifice his financial stability to fund David's legal defense. And, he invested a significant amount of his own money in hiring the best legal team to work on David's case. So, throughout his involvement in

David's case, Joe spent a whopping 4 million dollars! That's an insane amount of money to spend on someone you barely know right.

But, Joe believed that David was innocent and he had the money to help him, so he did.

Then, after David's trial concluded in 1995, the first appeal application was submitted to the New Zealand Court of Appeal. This appeal focused on a key aspect that Joe believed had been overlooked by the judge during the original trial. The appeal sought to highlight the decision made by the judge to refuse to admit the testimony of Dean Cottles, who had offered testimony in regards to Laniet being SA'd by their Dad. However, the Court of Appeals declined to hear the appeal because the Crown's case appeared very strong, and the defense theory was not possible. 

Then, 3 years after David's conviction for the killings in 2000, he filed a petition with the governor-general of New Zealand seeking a pardon. This request was subsequently forwarded to the minister of justice for review. However, David did not receive a pardon. But, despite the denial of a pardon, the judge minister determined that there were significant errors made during the investigation, and these errors could have led to mistakes in the Crown's case against David Bain.

So, 6 years later the Privy Council heard David's appeal against the Court of

Appeal's verdict. And, the hearing happened a year later in May 2007, when the privy Council quashed David's conviction for the five killings and recommended a retrial. The Privy Council suppressed David's conviction and recommended a retrial

based on the evidence presented, and following the decision by the Privy Council, the Solicitor General of New Zealand confirmed that a retrial would indeed take place. 

According to the Privy Council, certain aspects of David's trial troubled

them. One of the issues was that the jury was not made aware that Robin was apparently (as they put it) "seriously disturbed" and had hit a student at the school where he was principal. Additionally, it was revealed that Robin had previously published sadistic stories in the school's newsletter, including a story involving the murder of a family. (I haven't seen proof of these allegations, so I don't know if this is true).

Apparently another point of concern during the trial was the testimony of an optometrist regarding the ownership of the glasses found in David's room. Initially, the optometrist said that the glasses belonged to David, contradicting David's statement that the glasses belonged to his mother. However, the optometrist later changed his stance and claimed the glasses did belong to Margaret Bain. See, I don't know if this is true either. I guess if they were his mums, he could have been borrowing them? 

I mean if they had similar prescription lenses it's possible. But, also they could be David's glasses. I don't know for sure.

So, according to the Privy Council, the conflicting evidence presented by the

optometrist may have negatively impacted David's credibility in the eyes of the jury. Furthermore, the Privy Council said during the trial that the jury had believed that the prints made in blood on the rifle by David was human blood. However, a test conducted on the blood revealed that the sample did not test positive for human DNA and was actually animal blood. They think it was from when David shot a possum or a rabbit in the months before the murders of his family.

So, David Bain's retrial kicked off on March 6th 2009, with the jury being sworn in, and he pleaded not guilty to killing his family. Both the prosecution and defense presented their opening statements to the court, and the crown began by informing the jury that all the evidence presented would be circumstantial but strong. And they said that all the available evidence pointed towards David as the perpetrator of the killings. So, the Crown presented evidence in the form of a conversation that David had with a friend 6 days before the killings. During this conversation, David expressed feeling a "gut feeling" that "something horrible" was going to happen. Furthermore, the Crown presented testimony that David had confided in his close friend shortly after the killings took place. He told her that the events that had unfolded were what he had told her about previously.

Then, David's defense team presented their theory that Robin Bain was responsible for the killings and then took his own life. 

The reason behind his actions was said to be the impending revelation of his incestuous relationship with his daughter, Laniet. 

According to the defense, Robin was deeply depressed and knew that his

life would be ruined if the truth about their relationship came to light.

One of the key pieces of evidence allegedly destroyed by police was Laniet's diary. This diary was believed to have contained entries that shed light on the sexual abuse that had taken place between her and her dad. The defense said that the diary being lost or destroyed had hindered their ability to present a comprehensive case and restricted their defense strategy. So, during the trial, the defense called several witnesses who claimed to know about the incestuous relationship between Robin and Laniet. One witness was Sean Clarke. He was a student at Otago University who knew both David and Laniet. 

Remember, he is acquainted with both Laniet and David.

He testified that one month before the killings that Laniet was upset and confided in him that she could no longer tolerate what Robin was doing to her. According to Sean, Laniet was living in her father's caravan and expressed a desire to move back into the family home, away from Robin. Another witness for the defense, Linda Miller, told the court in 1993 and 1994 that she was working at the Dunedin massage parlor and became acquainted with Laniet. I'm pretty sure that I read that Linda was a sex worker. And, Linda said that Laniet confided in her that her father was SA'ing her.

Furthermore, another witness, a Dunedin shop owner, testified that in early 1994, Laniet came into his shop visibly upset. When he asked what was wrong, Laniet told him that she was experiencing problems at home, which had led her to start using drugs. During her conversation with the store owner, Laniet admitted to having an affair with her father. Do you believe these people? I'm not sure ae. I mean, Joe Karam had alot of money. He could have paid people to provide false statements.

Just a theory of mine.

Also, Stephen Cousins, Laniet's former employer, said Laniet told him about the SA and he told the court he tried to get Laniet to go to the police. I guess some of these statements could be true, but I don't know. My gut feeling is that it's all made up to make Robin look like a monster.. But, I don't know for sure. Like, if Robin was doing these horrible things to Laniet, then that's disgusting and I feel so sad for her.. But, why come forward now?? Where were these witnesses before? Were they coerced? Maybe.. I mean, Joe Karam had already paid out alot of money to get David a good legal team.. Who's to say he didn't pay some people to make false statements. This guy had connections. I'm not saying he paid people off.

I'm saying anything is possible in this case. So, David Bain's retrial lasted approximately three months. And it was a media circus! During this time, the crown presented over 130 witnesses, while the defense called 54 witnesses. Then the trial wrapped up on May 27th 2009, and the jury went away to deliberate for several hours. 

My opinion:

Humans aren't really great at figuring out "reasonable doubt" when there are a bunch of factors involved. This jury had a bunch of circumstantial evidence chucked at them.. And the chances of the jury going away and coming back with a definite guilty or not guilty verdict gets way more unlikely with each piece of information, circumstantial evidence or witness statement they hear. So, it doesn't really matter if it's technically possible for those things to happen. What really matters is the odds of each thing happening together. And sometimes, jurors can kind of miss the importance of stuff like David having injuries on his body that he kind of just couldn't explain, or losing a glasses lens in his brother's room (if in fact they were his glasses).. Which I think they were because the optometrist said they were in the first trial, and also why would the lense be in Steven's room and the rest of the glasses be in David's.

There is also the fact that Robin didnt have injuries on his body apart from the gunshot wound and a tiny indentation that could honestly be a paper cut rather than an indentation from the rifle. Plus, from looking at the crime scene pictures... Robin was clean.. Like, he didn't have his families blood on him.. Which you would expect from someone who went on a murderous rampage.

I mean there was blood all over the gloves and sweater found that the killer wore, so why wasn't Robin covered in blood? Yes, he could have had a shower after killing his family, but my argument there is this guy had a full bladder when they did his autopsy. If he had a shower you would expect him to go pee in the shower right? Hearing water run makes me want to pee when I'm already busting to go.. If you have a full bladder when you wake up (which alot of us do), one of the first things you do is go pee. Really think on this guys! You wake up.. You need to pee.. You aren't going to go kill your entire family, have a scuffle with your 14 year old son, turn on a pc, clean yourself up etc before you go pee.

I don't think Robin did it.

But, I can't say 100% if I think he SA'd his daughter 'Laniet'.

From the argument I just gave, if I was on this case I probably wouldn't be accusing him of the killings. It just doesn't add up in my mind. What does add up is all the evidence they found on David. Oh! and the fact that the family computer was turned on when David got home from his paper run... Make that make sense people! So, David's legal team was saying that Robin typed his suicide note on the family computer. (I know I'm being repetitive).. Just go with me on this kay.. But instead of explaining his actions, he basically lets David off the hook by saying... "Sorry, you are the only one who deserved to stay." It just doesn't add up! Why would Robin type a note instead of writing it first of all? He was old school and this was the 90's. Writing it would be waaaay faster! Plus, stuff waiting for a computer to boot up when you need to pee. And why would he let David live? He didn't even really like David! Laniet was his favorite.

So anyway, the jury came back and they had reached a verdict. David Bain was found not guilty! (Basically, he was acquitted).

Ok, so there are a couple of concerning things about this jury that we should all take note of. There were two jurors in particular that really bother me. They were a man and a woman. These two actually congratulated David Bain after the verdict and went to his celebratory party! These two also didn't seem to pay much attention during the trial. And, instead of focusing on the evidence and closing arguments, they were seen giggling and passing notes to each other. Also, one of the jurors seemed to have trouble understanding the evidence, and another one congratulated David's lawyers after the verdict.

Following his acquittal, David embarked on a three-month European holiday paid for by his supporters. However, ten months after his release, David found himself facing challenges in finding work. The lack of financial resources became particularly evident as he struggled to make ends meet. And in 2010, David submitted a claim for compensation for his wrongful imprisonment.

His case fell outside the Cabinet's compensation rules. However,

David was entitled to compensation if he could establish his innocence on "the balance of probabilities." Given the case's high-profile nature, the Minister of Justice decided to appoint an overseas judge, retired Canadian Supreme Court Justice Ian Binnie, to examine David's application. After conducting a year-long investigation, Justice Binnie issued his conclusion in September 2012. And he determined that the Dunedin police had committed numerous errors that directly led to David's wrongful conviction. Justice Binnie declared that David was innocent of the murders in 1994 and that compensation should be awarded to him for his wrongful conviction and imprisonment. During Binnie's inquiry, he had the opportunity to meet with David and conduct a thorough interview. He characterized David as a "credible witness" who provided compelling testimony during his examination. However, the government commissioned a second report from a retired Australian judge, Ian Callinan. Justice Callinan was instructed not to read Binnie's report and chose not to talk to David while conducting his investigation. 

On August 2, 2016, Adams announced that Callinan had found David was not innocent "on the balance of probabilities. On the basis of the final Callinan report, the Crown rejected David's compensation application. However, it offered an ex-gratia0+ payment of $925,000 to settle the matter and bring closure to all parties. David reluctantly accepted this offer.

After all of this David changed his name, and the couple had two children. They moved to Australia for a bit but are currently living here in New Zealand. I won't say where they live, but it easy to Google, I guess.

I know I have my opinions on this case, and I personally think David Bain is guilty, and I think our country paid a killer a bunch of money.

So many people here in New Zealand are stuck between Robin and David, but there was so much evidence pointing towards David. Also, Robin had a full bladder! He would have gone for a wee first, right?

All that aside, it's important to remember that regardless of who was responsible, five people lost their lives in their own home. Three of the victims were teenagers who had their whole lives ahead of them. Arawa was passionate about teaching and guiding the next generation. Laniet, although she had some issues, was seeking a fresh start and healing. Stephen, just old enough to be home alone, tragically encountered a trusted adult wielding a gun instead of waking up for school. The real sadness lies in the fact that these young people never got the chance to fulfill their dreams and now rest in a cemetery alongside their parents.

And this brings us to the end of today's story.