Wednesday, December 5, 2012

And I found it at the Dim-Post

I have been trying to sum up my thoughts on the decision of Judith Collins to seek a review of the Bain review.  Sanctuary nailed it over at Danyl's place:
Personally, I think David Bain killed his entire family in cold blood and concocted a preposterous charade to try and evade responsibility for his actions, for which he was entirely and properly seen through and convicted and jailed. And there it would have sat, had he not had the great good fortune of attracting the attention of an outsider and a rather strange rebel in search of a cause, one Joe Karam, who unaccountably put his fortune at Mr. Bain’s disposal until such time as they was able to generate enough obfustication and obscuration to secure an over-turning of the verdict.

That is what I think, personally.

But we live in a system where what I personally think doesn’t amount to diddly squat, and frankly neither should it. If the state says he is innocent, and therefore the state wrongly imprisoned him, then the state has to pay for that. John Key might think the state should be flexible enough to accomodate his amateur hour Bainimarama impressions, but I think I’ll stick to the rule of rule – good, bad and indifferent.
 Apart from most of the last sentence, maybe Sanctuary and I were separated at birth.

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

Of course JC could just say "no" and save us a wack of dosh. Its not like David's obviously and transparently squeaky clean - that doubt has a price. Be grateful David - there are worse things than getting out early and getting a shot in women's mags. On second thoughts...

3:16

Psycho Milt said...

The thing is, the state hasn't said that Bain is innocent, or that he was wrongly imprisoned. Which means he doesn't meet the standard criteria for compensation, so the govt is considering whether to make an exception and provide him with compensation on the basis that it considers he most likely is innocent on the balance of probabilities.

That bit is worth repeating: the govt is considering whether to make an exception in this case, ie the fact is that yes it is entirely up to Cabinet to decide whether or not Bain gets handed some of our hard-earned cash - Sanctuary is quite wrong in thinking Key is claiming some sort of dictatorial power over this.

Anonymous said...

If I had been on that first jury, I would be feeling so insulted and angry. They believed their verdict was sound, but we now live in an age where criminals are pardoned anyway. The second jury didn't find him innocent, but they did get caught up in the media hype.

The Veteran said...

PM nails it

Bazza said...

A letter to the Editor in the NZ Herald yesterday questioned the difference between Judith Collins seeking a second opinion and David Bain having a second trial after being found guilty in the first.