| crime.files |
| |
 |
|
| crime.features |
| |
|
|
| crime.resources |
| |
|
|
| crime.co.nz |
| |
|
|
|
| |
A Dunedin Opinion
We have been bombarded with the 'rights and wrongs' of the Bain trial. We've seen a witch hunt for truth, suggestions of corruption but finally just one thing is fact. Five members of the Bain family are dead; one is alive.
Consider the stupidity of this: David's loving father Robin, who was capable, without remorse to murder his whole family then turned the rifle on himself? Fine, one may say, but he left his eldest, loved son alive and with caring left a computer message for him. So why did Robin, displaying this regard to David, leave so much incriminating evidence against him? What a loving father Robin must have been.
Let's imagine how Robin could have talked his way through this situation. "I am going to murder my family then commit suicide. Do I really care if I leave my fingerprints all over the place or had I better wear my son's white gloves, not mine. Then, when they need to be removed to clear a rifle obstruction, to discard them in the crime scene? Now, I had better clean-up all this mess on me and change my socks? I'll have a cuppa or two to allow a time differential between the first four killings and my demise. Mustn't forget the message to my son; now it's my turn to shoot myself. I just hope David, when he sorts out the washing, doesn't notice the blood and that the wash he chooses to do first, has those bloody socks in it."
So that ends my opening gambit and if it appears a bit ludicrous then maybe the point's been made.
Now to David and Goliath by Joe Karam and The Mask of Sanity by James McNeish. Both, obviously, have one thing in common, David Bain. Then they follow different paths, though at times interlock at points of interest based on one's perception of the questioned evidence.
I cannot help feeling amazed at how so many people in positions of integrity, trust and respect seem to have got this case so wrong, from the telephone operator to the Privy Council, that today David remains incarcerated, his freedom denied. However that is just one's own opinion. The other being that a child who was so indoctrinated by his mother, growing to manhood, fearing in his mind the perfect family image was about to collapse, became an uncontrollable tool to destroy those, which to others, he displayed he loved. Was sanctuary to be an empty dream after all, or was his desire to escape the shackles of this dysfunctional family too great to comprehend?
Being a resident in our tranquil Dunedin I recall the disbelief that in such a short time there had been another multiple murder. The initial fear that the offender could still be at large, then relief it was a murder/suicide, and our streets were safe, then the arrest.
News of the case was everywhere, likewise were the opinions of anyone who cared to speak and listen. Very quickly the victims disappeared and all eyes were on the survivor who now became, in essence, the victim. David certainly was the center of attention.
The firing of the family home came with mixed emotions and then relative peace, time to recover ones' thoughts before the trial. Time went surprisingly fast, yet time would appear to be relevant. In my view, the only relevance to time was that innocent people had theirs taken from them. All other times can be explained logically and to some extent are, in both publications. Time is man-made and such can either be controlled or fleeting. One person has the whole facts associated with time in this case, but where is he?
Much about the family has been documented. For outsiders looking in, they appeared normal but for those who knew them, they were not. This is portrayed within each publication to differing extents.
I am bemused at the intent of these publications; one seen as a crusader for David for a supposed injustice he inherited, the other whose background, as displayed in his works of fighting for the underdog of injustices, now at odds with each other. Both publications are based on injustice yet I fear that the only injustice has been not allowing David the ability to step down from the stage to allow himself time to reflect on his actions. That is if he needs to. If David is the victim then again time will allow the truth to be told.
|
|
|
A local's opinion on the two books by G. Stephenson |
|