"David Bain is disappointed with the decision that he will not receive compensation for wrongfully spending 13 years in prison. Justice Minister Amy Adams said today that retired judge Ian Callinan
had found that Bain was not innocent "on the balance of probabilities". Speaking to the NZ Herald at his Christchurch home today, Bain professed his innocence. "Quite frankly, the only thing I have to say is that Mr Callinan, Ms
Adams and everybody that's been involved in the case to date have got
it wrong: I am innocent. That will always be my only comment and there's
nothing else I have to say on the matter," Bain said. He refused to answer any more questions. As a result of the decision, the Government would not be making an apology or compensating Bain for his time spent in prison.
However, Adams also said that Bain's team had promised to make a legal challenge to Callinan's report. In an unusual move, the Government has agreed to make an ex gratia payment to Bain in the interests of bringing closure to the long-running claim. A full and final payment of $925,000 has been accepted by Bain's team. Adams stressed that the payment was not compensation, and had been offered solely to avoid further litigation and costs to the Crown......... The ex gratia payment for Bain is likely to stir further debate about another compensation case, for Teina Pora. Pora was last month found innocent on the balance of probabilities and was awarded $2.5 million for wrongfully spending 20 years in prison. His legal team is now challenging that payout, saying it should have been adjusted for inflation.........A 2012 report by former Canadian Supreme Court Justice Ian Binnie recommended compensation based on the view that Bain was probably innocent - not innocent beyond reasonable doubt. Binnie said today that the $925,000 payment was not enough to pay for the 13 years Bain spent in jail and full compensation should have been awarded. He said the ex gratia payment was a compromise aimed at halting further legal challenges from Bain but was not enough. "It is not uncommon for Governments to make ex gratia payments when they don't want to admit fault but where the Government's case doesn't pass the smell test. $925,000 is a lot of money for passing the smell test. "But he's entitled to more. To turn around to a man you've put in prison which your highest court says you did wrongfully and to say you get zero compensation seems to me well below the international standard." A former Canada Supreme Court judge, Binnie's 2012 recommendation that Bain had met the threshold for compensation was rejected by then Justice Minister Judith Collins. He believed the Government was determined not to admit Bain was wrongfully convicted"They did not want to concede in any way that an innocent man had been wrongfully prosecuted and put in jail for 13 years. "I think in most countries putting somebody in jail for 13 years on a wrongful conviction warrants compensation. New Zealand is paying zero compensation." Binnie said his view Bain deserved compensation was stronger now than when he wrote his report.........Law expert Professor Chris Gallavin welcomed the ex-grata payment of $925,000 to Bain as a "pragmatic and realistic fix to a messy problem". While he says the figure is similar to the amount Bain would've received if compensation was granted - a starting figure of $100,000 per year of imprisonment - the difference is that it does not come with an apology. "With this payment, the case is now, once and for all, finally, finished," said Gallavin, Deputy Pro Vice-Chancellor, College of Humanities and Social Sciences, Massey University. "I am sure David himself is delighted along with the Minister, the public and perhaps also the extended family of the victims who have lived with this case in the media for more than 20 years." However, Gallavin said the case shows that the compensation process needs to be revised. Irrespective of what one thinks of Bain's guilt or innocence, there has been two reports from eminent international jurists who reached different conclusions, he points out. "The question I am therefore left with is the fairness of requiring someone who is possibly the victim of a miscarriage of justice having to 'prove' their own innocence particularly where the team needed to mount such an application will need to largely act pro bono," Gallavin said. He advocates for a Criminal Cases Review Panel as a "proactive and positive tool for the smooth operation of the system - away from the currently awkward and unsatisfactory process"......... The brother of Arthur Allan Thomas, pardoned after spending nine years in prison for the 1970 murders of Harvey and Jeanette Crewe, slammed the decision not to award compensation to Bain. Younger brother Des Thomas believes Bain is entitled to compensation given that he was cleared by a jury. "What's the point in a fulla being found not guilty, isn't that what the jury is for? If he's found not guilty, then he's not guilty," Thomas said. "The problem that we have in this country is that once the police plant or manufacture evidence, or get a case wrong, and then you are convicted, then no-one will accept responsibility. "Justice Minister Amy Adams says the system works, but how can the system work if Arthur spent nine years in jail, Pora spent 21 years in jail, Bain 13 years in prison, and now Scott Watson. It's not right and no-one is interested in correcting all of this? It's unbelievable. You wouldn't think we are a democracy. I blame the politicians - I believe they are too gutless." Thomas accused the government of "shopping around until they get a finding that suits themselves". The decision will be a blow to Bain, not just because of the money, but because "all the innuendo will carry on"."
http://m.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11685735
See Wikipedia account at the link below: "Justice Binnie's report 2012"..." In addition to examining the legal issues, Justice Binnie interviewed Bain to ascertain the impact of spending almost 13 years in prison and the endless negative publicity about him. In regard to his time in prison, Bain told Binnie that soon after he was incarcerated, he was assaulted by another prisoner who broke two of his teeth and left him with cuts and bruises. "When I was first imprisoned I was put on suicide watch which involved the prison officers turning on my cell light to check on me every 15 minutes [which] effectively became a means of torture. I suffered constant migraines, depression and loneliness." In regard to the publicity, he said he found it just as hard to adjust to being out of prison: "Everywhere I go, and in everything I do, I am always recognised and either comments are made or people question me... It is not a comfortable thing being known for something as traumatic as the events I have suffered through".[45] Bain also expressed concern at the loss of a possible career as a singer. At the time of his arrest, he had been studying for a degree in music and drama. His music teacher told him he had a "wonderful voice" and had the potential to become an international opera singer.[45]
After a year long investigation, Binnie concluded, in a 180-page report,[17] that Dunedin's police had made "egregious errors" and that there were "numerous instances" of investigative ineptitude that led directly to the wrongful conviction. In particular, he described the failure of the Crown to preserve evidence in the murder investigation, by burning down the house, as one of the "extraordinary circumstances" that the Cabinet should take into account.[46] Another was the failure of the police to test Robin’s hands and clothing for residue of firearms discharge.[17]:157 Police also failed to investigate information that Laniet had accused her father of incest and planned to expose him to the rest of the family and failed to follow up on evidence of Robin Bain’s mental instability despite the Detectives Manual specifically instructing police to pursue the issue of motive. They also misled the first jury on where the lens of David's spectacles was found and knowingly gave the jury the wrong time for the switching on of the family computer. Altogether, Binnie identified 12 different mistakes or failings by the police.[47] Binnie decided the evidence established that "the miscarriage of justice was the direct result of a police investigation characterised by carelessness and lack of due diligence"[48] and wrote: "in what is essentially a circumstantial case, it is noteworthy that the Police chose to exclude the one suspect (Robin) who was alleged to have a plausible if challenged motive, and pursue for 15 years the other suspect (David) for whom they had found no motive whatsoever."[17]:173 He concluded that "on the balance of probabilities" Bain was innocent of the murders in 1994 and should be paid compensation for wrongful conviction and imprisonment."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bain_family_murders
However, Adams also said that Bain's team had promised to make a legal challenge to Callinan's report. In an unusual move, the Government has agreed to make an ex gratia payment to Bain in the interests of bringing closure to the long-running claim. A full and final payment of $925,000 has been accepted by Bain's team. Adams stressed that the payment was not compensation, and had been offered solely to avoid further litigation and costs to the Crown......... The ex gratia payment for Bain is likely to stir further debate about another compensation case, for Teina Pora. Pora was last month found innocent on the balance of probabilities and was awarded $2.5 million for wrongfully spending 20 years in prison. His legal team is now challenging that payout, saying it should have been adjusted for inflation.........A 2012 report by former Canadian Supreme Court Justice Ian Binnie recommended compensation based on the view that Bain was probably innocent - not innocent beyond reasonable doubt. Binnie said today that the $925,000 payment was not enough to pay for the 13 years Bain spent in jail and full compensation should have been awarded. He said the ex gratia payment was a compromise aimed at halting further legal challenges from Bain but was not enough. "It is not uncommon for Governments to make ex gratia payments when they don't want to admit fault but where the Government's case doesn't pass the smell test. $925,000 is a lot of money for passing the smell test. "But he's entitled to more. To turn around to a man you've put in prison which your highest court says you did wrongfully and to say you get zero compensation seems to me well below the international standard." A former Canada Supreme Court judge, Binnie's 2012 recommendation that Bain had met the threshold for compensation was rejected by then Justice Minister Judith Collins. He believed the Government was determined not to admit Bain was wrongfully convicted"They did not want to concede in any way that an innocent man had been wrongfully prosecuted and put in jail for 13 years. "I think in most countries putting somebody in jail for 13 years on a wrongful conviction warrants compensation. New Zealand is paying zero compensation." Binnie said his view Bain deserved compensation was stronger now than when he wrote his report.........Law expert Professor Chris Gallavin welcomed the ex-grata payment of $925,000 to Bain as a "pragmatic and realistic fix to a messy problem". While he says the figure is similar to the amount Bain would've received if compensation was granted - a starting figure of $100,000 per year of imprisonment - the difference is that it does not come with an apology. "With this payment, the case is now, once and for all, finally, finished," said Gallavin, Deputy Pro Vice-Chancellor, College of Humanities and Social Sciences, Massey University. "I am sure David himself is delighted along with the Minister, the public and perhaps also the extended family of the victims who have lived with this case in the media for more than 20 years." However, Gallavin said the case shows that the compensation process needs to be revised. Irrespective of what one thinks of Bain's guilt or innocence, there has been two reports from eminent international jurists who reached different conclusions, he points out. "The question I am therefore left with is the fairness of requiring someone who is possibly the victim of a miscarriage of justice having to 'prove' their own innocence particularly where the team needed to mount such an application will need to largely act pro bono," Gallavin said. He advocates for a Criminal Cases Review Panel as a "proactive and positive tool for the smooth operation of the system - away from the currently awkward and unsatisfactory process"......... The brother of Arthur Allan Thomas, pardoned after spending nine years in prison for the 1970 murders of Harvey and Jeanette Crewe, slammed the decision not to award compensation to Bain. Younger brother Des Thomas believes Bain is entitled to compensation given that he was cleared by a jury. "What's the point in a fulla being found not guilty, isn't that what the jury is for? If he's found not guilty, then he's not guilty," Thomas said. "The problem that we have in this country is that once the police plant or manufacture evidence, or get a case wrong, and then you are convicted, then no-one will accept responsibility. "Justice Minister Amy Adams says the system works, but how can the system work if Arthur spent nine years in jail, Pora spent 21 years in jail, Bain 13 years in prison, and now Scott Watson. It's not right and no-one is interested in correcting all of this? It's unbelievable. You wouldn't think we are a democracy. I blame the politicians - I believe they are too gutless." Thomas accused the government of "shopping around until they get a finding that suits themselves". The decision will be a blow to Bain, not just because of the money, but because "all the innuendo will carry on"."
http://m.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11685735
See Wikipedia account at the link below: "Justice Binnie's report 2012"..." In addition to examining the legal issues, Justice Binnie interviewed Bain to ascertain the impact of spending almost 13 years in prison and the endless negative publicity about him. In regard to his time in prison, Bain told Binnie that soon after he was incarcerated, he was assaulted by another prisoner who broke two of his teeth and left him with cuts and bruises. "When I was first imprisoned I was put on suicide watch which involved the prison officers turning on my cell light to check on me every 15 minutes [which] effectively became a means of torture. I suffered constant migraines, depression and loneliness." In regard to the publicity, he said he found it just as hard to adjust to being out of prison: "Everywhere I go, and in everything I do, I am always recognised and either comments are made or people question me... It is not a comfortable thing being known for something as traumatic as the events I have suffered through".[45] Bain also expressed concern at the loss of a possible career as a singer. At the time of his arrest, he had been studying for a degree in music and drama. His music teacher told him he had a "wonderful voice" and had the potential to become an international opera singer.[45]
After a year long investigation, Binnie concluded, in a 180-page report,[17] that Dunedin's police had made "egregious errors" and that there were "numerous instances" of investigative ineptitude that led directly to the wrongful conviction. In particular, he described the failure of the Crown to preserve evidence in the murder investigation, by burning down the house, as one of the "extraordinary circumstances" that the Cabinet should take into account.[46] Another was the failure of the police to test Robin’s hands and clothing for residue of firearms discharge.[17]:157 Police also failed to investigate information that Laniet had accused her father of incest and planned to expose him to the rest of the family and failed to follow up on evidence of Robin Bain’s mental instability despite the Detectives Manual specifically instructing police to pursue the issue of motive. They also misled the first jury on where the lens of David's spectacles was found and knowingly gave the jury the wrong time for the switching on of the family computer. Altogether, Binnie identified 12 different mistakes or failings by the police.[47] Binnie decided the evidence established that "the miscarriage of justice was the direct result of a police investigation characterised by carelessness and lack of due diligence"[48] and wrote: "in what is essentially a circumstantial case, it is noteworthy that the Police chose to exclude the one suspect (Robin) who was alleged to have a plausible if challenged motive, and pursue for 15 years the other suspect (David) for whom they had found no motive whatsoever."[17]:173 He concluded that "on the balance of probabilities" Bain was innocent of the murders in 1994 and should be paid compensation for wrongful conviction and imprisonment."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bain_family_murders
