David Bain has offered a few words in support of his compensation in the wake of the controversy surrounding the government's apparent rejection of Binnie's report.  He compares his case with the Arthur Allan Thomas case, where the police deliberately planted evidence, however this did not happen in the Bain case.

Joe Karam has written an opinion piece in response to the Minister of Justice slating Binnie's investigation of the Bain compensation bid.

Ian Binnie's report is now published.  The MoJ site has been overrun but you can download from scoop as follows:

Binnie's revised report:

Since the Minister of Justice, Judith Collins slated Binnie's report on the Bain compensation bid, there has been an ongoing slanging match in the media.  Binnie has struck back by publicizing some of this reasoning, including why he thinks the case meets the extraordinary circumstances test.

According to the Minister of Justice, Judith Collins, Justice Binnie used some material given to him by Joe Karam and which she considers to be incorrect.  In parliament today she gave two examples of incorrect facts in the report submitted by Binnie.  One is as follows:

The Minister of Justice, Judith Collins, has announced that in her opinion Justice Binnie went way beyond the terms of reference asked of him.  In addition she claims that he unreasonably criticized some of the witnesses who testified in the retrial.

The Herald has published a copy of Justice Binnie's press release in relation to the Minister of Justice's public comments slating Binnie's report on the Bain compensation.  From

Michael Reed, lawyer for the Bain defence team has requested to see the report made by Binnnie in relation to the compensation bid.  Reed is concerned about the secrecy currently taking place and would like to personally see the alleged misunderstanding of NZ law.

The Minister of Justice has revealed some of her reasoning behind the decision to get another Judge to review the Bain compensation bid.  Amongst her reasoning is that the report uses "assumptions based on incorrect facts" and a misunderstanding of New Zealand law.

The Minister is quoted as saying the following (courtesy of