David Bain's groomsman was a convicted criminal

Opinion: It was recently reported that David Bain's groomsman was convictered killer Paul Wilson, who served 15 years for raping and murdering a former girlfriend in 1994, about a month before the Bain murders.  Wilson stood beside Bain at the alter while he got married.  The other two groomsmen were Karam's two sons, with Matthew acting as best man.  Karam is quoted as saying: "They sort of naturally became ... very close friends. The single person he [Mr Bain] has spent the most time with over the past 18 years is Paul Wilson."

While it is understandable that Bain would befriend people while in jail and coincidentally they would be criminals, I would think that if you felt you didn't belong there, then that would be a reason not to establish deep friendships but also you would find that you were not able too identify with the other people because of the criminal choices they made. If such barriers did not exist for David, then he felt that he belonged there. Well we know he did.


Disturbing news, yet unsurprising to those that have followed this saga objectively. I hope this revelation makes people sit up and take notice.


People tend to form friendships regardless of circumstances. Stockholm syndrome is a classic example. Everyone in prison has been convicted of a crime so it would be impossible to make friends that have not been convicted of a crime.

I agree, and that is the angle that Karam is taking, however Bain had very good contacts with people on the outside, and married someone he didn't share a cell with, but whom he was in contact with during his time inside, since she is a daughter of an ardent supporter.  To a certain extent Bain would have needed to befriend people inside for his own protection and it appears that Wilson became something of a mentor.  But to then make that person one of your groomsmen at your wedding indicates that Wilson means something to him outside of prison.  This is coming from a person, Bain, who is trying to tell us that he did not belong in prison.  Retaining Wilson by his right hand side is telling me that he does not want to reject this part of his life as wrongful and uncalled for.

People do aweful things sometimes. Should a persons entire life be judged on a single very bad decision and shunned like a lepper once they have served their prison punishement ? Wilson admitted his guilt and served his sentence. While he can never undo his actions I do believe that he needs to be given the ability to continue his life - including acting as a groomsman. The moral question would then apply to - should murderers be avoided like lepper? rapists ? Should that judgement be extended to people convicted of assault, arson, fraudsters and thieves ? Drink drivers? Pehaps to politicians that had to pay back "dubiously claimed overpayments" ?

Elv, of course people should be given second chances for crimes they commit (especially teenagers) but there is a limit and it is relative to the type of crimes committed.

When people like the evil William Bell are released again and again (how many convictions? 80-100?) to prey on the public over and over then you know we have a dysfunctional, morally bankrupt "Justice" system.

Kimberly Schroder will never get a second chance at life, and her family were handed a life-long sentence - something they did not ask for.

Anyone who commits a murder like the one Paul Wilson committed should never be released - not ever - because the crime is unforgivable. This is true justice, i.e., receiving the consequences of your actions.

I would never associate with a person like Wilson because of what he did. And I negatively judge people who do.

I always say that marriage is the leading cause of divorce.  This marriage better work for big ears.  If it doesn't imagine how much Women's day will pay for the tell all scoop?

This is a typical comment of someone who gets caught up in emotion and then starts making personal attacks. Why don't you re-read what I actually said - it is subtle and I think you totally missed the point made. Personal attacks don't benfit a discussion and sometimes lead to defamation cases that distract from the actual issue.

Well, elv, sorry I was just being cheeky in the context of a vigorous debate as often happens in our parliament.  But it does intrigue me how many women around the World fall for vicious convicted felons.  I guess it does refect the better part of female character - the nurturing and softer side.  

In reply to by Bushlawyer


It appears a reporter and a photographer from the NZ Herald were invited to the wedding. I believe this was probably because the NZ Herald has tended to be pro David Bain.
But the question that could be asked is  "Should David Bain have had a convicted murderer as a groomsman knowing a newspaper reporter was going to be at the wedding?".
I personally believe that either the media should not have been invited or else Wilson should not have been a groomsman.
If that reporter had not been at the wedding we would probably have never known Wilson was a groomsman.
Had Wilson just been one of the guests we would probably have never known he was at the wedding.

It is easy to fall for the charms of a felon who happens to be someones son (or daughter). Someone who can be nice, charming and personable. In the particular case of Davina Murray who fell for rapist Liam Reed, she is just disillusioned by love. Recorded conversations between her and Liam show him alternating between abusive and nurturing. There is a saying:" the brain is an incredibe organ it works 24 hours a day 365 days a year till one falls in love." 

Psychopaths are particularly good at exploiting others and therefore will come across as extremely charming and charismatic. This is because they use people and then dispose of them when they no longer suit their needs.

However there are also people who commit crimes that are not psychopaths and that are genuinely remorseful of their crimes. There is the tendency to label someone a criminal but they are human and may be quite a good human prior and post their crime.

I cannot judge Wilson. I find the crime he committed particularly brutal and horrible but I do not know how he has changed over his time in prison. The parole board found him fit to go back to society. 

From speaking to people who have been to prison - it is important to have friends in prison while in prison.  Life can be very difficult if you don't have any friends or know the protocol. NZ prisons are run by gangs, if you do not have gang affiliation it is important to have non gang friends. A loyal person would not just drop friends once they are out.


I don't have a problem with Wilson being invited to the wedding. But Bain should have known that if he invited a reporter to the wedding then the fact that he had Wilson as a groomsman would probably get a mention. 
He could have done without that sort of publicity and so could his bride,specially as she is a teacher. 

In reply to by Mike Stockdale


Do you think Bain makes all these decisions Mike?  It seems to me that Bain might have "killed the bastard" only to have another daddy to run his 40yo life.  Sort of selling your soul to the devil.  I am looking to see what happens when Joe Karam kicks the proverbial.


 Oh elv, I know all about people who kill who are not psychopaths.  I did read "Bungay on murder". I started reading Peter Williams' book but gave up on the deluded twaddle. I also happen to rememmber the feminist outcry over the Dr Minnit trial in Wellington and then saw how the same persons justified Gay Oakes conduct a few years later. Hypocrisy for my money.

Although I agree in part, I am sure that being a murderer, gang associated or not would trump a petty drug dealer for exanple. I would be surprised if there isn't a hierarchy of crimes, paedophiles being the lowest of the low. A killer one might assume would protect themselves by killing again in self defence. A killer would have agood chance of being left alone by petty thugs imo. 

Elv consistent logical punishment for crimes is something humans have great difficulty with, for instance we went from hanging people for murder in NZ in 1960 to only giving them 10 years in prison in the nineteen seventies how insane is that. My own preference is that if a murder is premeditated then a person should serve at least 40 years in prison, my own opinion is that a person who commits a premeditated murder deserves to die but because mistakes can be made i.e. AA Thomas I don't believe in the ultimate punishment, having said that I would gladly hang anybody that killed one of my family members, premeditated killer's deserve very little, and I would never befriend a known rapist and killer as Bain has done, he had no need as he had plenty of gullible supporters visiting him in prison, I think it’s just a case of birds of a feather.

Elv, the point I was trying to make is that Bain, unlike Wilson, did not show remorse for his time and he is loudly proclaiming, through his advocates, that he was wrongfully imprisoned.  If such be the case, then it would be logical for him to reject much of the identity he formed while in prison, including close friends, and move on.  The fact that he has embraced a fellow convict, who is not seeking compensation for wrongful imprisonment from the prison, indicates to me that he did not feel that his imprisonment was wrongful enough to reject it from his life, even partially.

I have no problem with Wilson serving his sentence by law, showing remorse and behaving as a model prisoner, getting a job when he got out and paying taxes until he is 65.  I can't help the fact that his victim is dead and has no release while this side of the River Styx.  What punishment we choose for murder is determined by the times that we live in, and we live in a liberal social democracy, but we still do have a punishment, however weak it may seem.


David was his friend, confidante and subject? A good way to understand how to manipulate people and how to mask tell tale traits?