Mike Stockdale's blog

David Bain had a great deal of bad luck.

Bad luck that his father was able to find the spare trigger lock key. 
Bad luck that his father decided to wear David's gloves instead of his own.
Bad luck that his father decided to wear gloves even though he was going to commit suicide.
Bad luck that the only identifiable prints on the rifle were David's.
Bad luck that those prints were in pristine condition and hadn't been smeared with all the handling of the rifle that morning.

What was the catalyst?

Was there a defining moment that caused David Bain to decide to kill his family?
I have a feeling it relates to the proposed new house.
At a geneology meeting he had called three weeks before the murders Robin Bain had mentioned that Margaret was talking about building a new house and that she had told him he wasn't going to be part of it,but he said that didn't matter because they couldn't afford to build a new house anyway.

The Bain killings. An impartial observer's view.

Was it David Bain who killed his family or did Robin Bain kill four members of his family and the commit suicide?

First of all let me say that although I am trying to be impartial I honestly believe that it is far more likely that David Bain murdered his family than it is that Robin Bain murdered four members of his family and then committed suicide .

Are the facts always as Karam would have us believe?

Here are some observations I have made after reading David and Goliath,Trial by Ambush,the Innocent booklet and listening to the Laws/Karam radio debate.

On page 343 of Trial by Ambush Karam writes "Doyle confirmed in his evidence that Dr Pryde strip-searched David". Doyle did no such thing.
Reed cross-examining Doyle at the retrial.
Q.He was subjected to very invasive tests of his body wasn't he?
A. He was examined by a doctor.

An opportunity missed ,perhaps.

When Martin van Beynen was at the Injustice Conference in Perth perhaps he should have asked David Bain about that reference he made about seeing his mother's light on and thinking he would make her a cup of tea.

The questions could have gone something like this.

Was there really enough doubt to find David Bain not guilty?

We know the jury found David Bain not guilty because they thought there was reasonable doubt.A juror wrote a letter to the paper making that very point.But was that the correct verdict,given the evidence that pointed to David Bain as being the killer?

Take those bruises on David Bain's head for example.David Bain had no explanation for them,all he could say is that he didn't have them when he was on his paper round.They were first noticed by Constable van Turnhout at 8.47am.

  • Joe Karam: They had to base their judgment on the evidence, not their feelings or emotions

    I feel a great pity for the jurors who sat to pronounce verdict on David Bain. I am sure that they were perplexed as to why this perfectly normal young man committed this atrocity. They had to base their judgment on the evidence presented to them, not their feelings or emotions. And the evidence was palpably false and misleading.

    Joe Karam David and Goliath page 137