The washing machine cycle

The washing machine cycle

The time the Bain washing machine took to go through it's cycle came up in the Karam/Laws debate.

Karam has argued that the washing machine could have completed it's cycle quicker than the time it took in the tests the Police had carried out.

In the debate Karam said that the prosecution's own witness said that the time the cycle took could have been quicker than the time of the test result.

I cannot find any record of this.

The Police carried out time tests relating to both the normal and special cycles.The normal cycle took 61 min 11s and 59 min 54s [two tests were carried out], and the special cycle took between 61 and 62 minutes.

When the Police arrived the machine was set at the normal cycle.

Now Karam reckoned the tests were carried out when the water pressure was low,and this would have slowed the time taken to fill the machine.He maintained a different result would have been achieved if the testing had been done at an earlier hour when water pressure was at it's greatest.So the Police re-interviewed the serviceman. He said the Bain machine took 14-15 minutes to fill, whereas the norm was 5-7 minutes. He also said that in the Bain case the filling time may have been due to the corrosion in the pipes between the washing machine and the street connection, rather than the pressure of the water.He said the highest water pressure would generally be when people were not using showers,etc.,but reiterated that in the Bain case the filling time may have been dictated by the state of the pipes rather than the water pressure.He did not think there would be a significant variation in filling at different times on different days.

Now Denise Laney saw David Bain at 6.45am [Karam was to suggest even a little later, but I firmly believe 6.45 is about right]. Bain then has to go inside, hang up his paper bag, etc., go downstairs and wash his hands, sort the washing into coloureds and whites,and then turn the washing machine on. Let's say that all took him about 4-5 minutes. So he starts the machine up at around 6.50am. The Police were in the laundry area at around 7.30am, 40 minutes later. 

Bain himself said the cycle usually took between 45 minutes and an hour. If he is telling the truth, then the time of the cycle may have been affected by water pressure. But it is hardly likely that there would be a variation of 15 minutes in a cycle due to water pressure,going by what the repairman said.So it would appear that David Bain may have realised that he would need to say 45 minutes to an hour because he had not been home for longer than 45 minutes by the time the police were in the vicinity of the washing machine.

So the way I see it, there is no way Bain could have done the washing when he came home from his paper round.

Permalink

I don't have speakers,but I seem to remember that Karam said to Laws that the Police were in the laundry area at around 7.33am.But the Police say that the time Arawa's body was located was 7.29am.and that they heard no noise from household appliances.If Karam did say 7.33,he is technically correct,I guess,the Police would probably have been in the the laundry area then,but they arrived there 4 minutes earlier.

What I really want to know Mike is wether they found any of my missing socks?

Ive got loads of socks that have no partner.Looked all over the place and have now come to the conclussion that ALL washing machines are like Dr Who's Tardis except instead of time travel they swap socks. For instance Im sure Ive got socks that dont belong to me and could of come from any washing machine from any part of the world so if you could send me a discription of your missing socks I will check to see if they have arrived at my place. Would appriciate it if others could check for me.

Ive sussed it out though and now only buy black socks which interchange.

Actually,Vic,joking aside,what was the final outcome re the socks that were in the wash?I understand a pair of David's socks were in the wash,they would have been the ones that he wore that had blood on at least one of them,I assume[oops].But were there any other socks in the wash,and if so ,how many pairs were there?

BTW,I don't have any trouble with my socks,I wear the same pair,year in,year out.When I am out walking,they walk ahead of me.I even wear them to bed,in the winter.

Now that I have looked Preston,the w/s repairman's evidence,I can see how Karam is able to say that the cycle could have been over in 45 minutes.When Preston was asked about the time it took for the w/m to go tyhrough it's cycle he replied

It took a lot longer than I expected,to be honest,etc.The normal sequence of events,that would have taken,the time,the machine would have taken about 40 minutes,but it took us closer to an hour to actually do the full cycle.

Then the defence went on to suggest that the reason why the cycle took so long was because the water pressure could have been lower due to people getting up and having showers,etc.The point being that the tests were not carried out at 6.45am,which is when Bain said he started the machine.

As I have mentioned before ,when Preston was called in by the PCA,he said he thought the reason why the Bain machine took longer than normal to fill was because of corrosion in the pipes,he doubted if water pressure had anything to do with it.but he didn't get to say this at the retrial,I guess because the pipes were not checked for corrosion.

BTW,this evidence was passed on to me by another member.I have not read the transcripts.

I would like to know how the defence explain how that lens came to be in Stephen's room,if anyone would care to post that from the transcripts.[I do not have a copy].

Mike the defence took a very arrogant stance on how the lens came to be in Stephens room Reed said "with out any evidence" that Weir had planted it there, which of course is about as silly as his other suggestion that Robin changed his clothes to meet his maker.

Ok,well I have read in the newspaper reports that the defence tried hard to get someone to say that the lens was planted,but that didn't work.Mrs Clark said that David had told her that he had been wearing his mother's glasses,did the defence argue about her statement,or did they accept  that David Bain had been wearing his mother's glasses?

In reply to by Mike Stockdale

Permalink

No the defence never accepted that David Bain had been wearing his mother's glasses Mike, they always seemed to have trouble accepting the truth.

They just ignored it as usual Mike, but I think Karam and the defence are now paying the price for ignoring the obvious, the tide has turned the trial verdict is most unpopular and not supported by the public in general.