In the Karam-Laws debate, Karam asserts emphatically the truth of statements which are clearly wrong.  After his many years' attention to the case he should know all the facts from both sides of the argument but yet he chooses to ignore anything that does not fit his view.

The subject in the Laws-Karam debate of the blood on Robin's hands has been previously covered but what wasn't covered were the statements that Karam made in the debate and how they relate to reality.  In the debate, Karam asserts that there were no other explanations for the blood on Robin's hands, whether made in the final address by the Crown or by detectives prosecuting the case.  If you listen to the audio, attached, you can see that this is the impression that he is imparting. 

His statement is entirely untrue.  There are explanations that the blood is the result of splatter from the wound, splatter which was also found elsewhere on Robin's clothes.  In addition, it is well known that Robin was working on the guttering of the house the previous day (Sunday) and may well have injured himself in so doing and so there are some explanations that any wounds or blood on the hands could have originated from that.

There are also marks on his hand which some have attempted to interpret as teeth marks but which can just as easily be interpreted as a corrugated iron impression, the mark that the end of the iron makes when you are gripping or working in the gutter and the back of your hand is pressed against the protuding iron roofing.