Since the end of the retrial new testimony has arisen regarding the Bain case. This testimony comes from someone who knew the Bain children and was out of the country until just before the trial and had not been made aware that the case had been brought back into play.
According to this witness Laniet left home at Every St, where she was living with her family, because of David. The testimony of this witness suggests that it was David who was behaving inappropriately towards his sisters (not his father) and that he was controlling and manipulative. Arawa felt that she could not go out to visit her friends without David wanting to follow along and Laniet felt scared and helpless.
This testimony represents new evidence, which in a criminal case might be sufficient for a retrial. Since we have already had a retrial and therefore double jeopardy applies, then there is no chance for a retrial. However, given that the Crown has been asked to do an assessment for compensation, then such an investigation must take this new evidence into account and the retrial verdict can no longer be used as a determinant of eligibility for compensation. In essence, the judge conducting the investigation must do a "retrial" including the new evidence.
This witness testimony has been sworn and is now included in the evidence that will be seen by the judge investigating the Bain compensation bid. In addition the testimony has been recorded on video.