Tuesday, August 2, 2016


Hon Amy Adams is reported to have rewarded David Bain with $925 000 as an ex gratia payment for the costs of being an ingrate after ex High Court Australia Justice Ian Calinan concluded Bain had not proven his innocence in the killing of his Dad Robin,  Mum Margaret, sister Arawa  brother Stephen and sister Laniet beyond the balance of probability.

I suppose as a small victory Robin is now excluded as a suspect.

I opined at the time of his acquittal in an rather inexplicable verdict at a second trial Bain should just slink away and be extremely grateful he had secured his freedom and maybe buy a LOTTO ticket. Nothing in the intervening years has led me to alter that opinion.

I wonder how many Melanoma sufferers who have never had as much as a parking ticket could have benefitted from an earlier funding of  Keytruda  with that almost one million dollars that is clearly a just shut up, depart  and don't come back Hush payment. Of course it is all on top of the disaster that was Bennie, two trials and god only knows how much more the long suffering taxpayers have flushed over the twenty two years of the saga.
Wonder why I am thinking thirty pieces of silver right now.


Anonymous said...

I wonder what happened to the inheritance from his parents etc he wasn't eligible for once convicted. I recall that went to another, more distant member of the family.

Probably the tax payer was seen as being easier to hit on.

Johno said...

That inheritance would have been a relative pittance. The house was a hovel.

I'm disgusted that Bain gets a cent, but at least now there's a chance he will indeed slink away.

Unless Womens Weekly et al persist in dredging him up.

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Why do so many idiots sound off in comments?

My guess is Bain will likely see little of the money once all the legal bills are paid. The taxpayer has a good deal here because if the payment had not been made you would have been facing further years of litigation at what cost? $3mil? $5mil? $10mil?

Wake up people.

Johno said...

Bain doesn't have any legal bills. He received $3mil in legal aid. No chance of that being re-charged.

Anonymous said...

More opinions unfettered by facts..... No one knows for sure whether he is guilty but when a jury finds a man not guilty it's up to society to respect that decision just as much as if it went the other way.

The police were utterly incompetent in this case and are the cause of all this angst. Any compensation should come out of police funding. If the Dodger has any evidence of wrong doing that has been overlooked then he should present himself to the nearest police station.

Lord Egbut Nobacon

Psycho Milt said...

...when a jury finds a man not guilty it's up to society to respect that decision...

It has. He walked from the court a free man and has remained at liberty since, with no attempts by society, in the form of its government, to put him back in gaol via some other means. The court's verdict doesn't bind our personal opinions though, and it doesn't oblige the government to pay compensation to someone who quite likely killed his entire family.

Johno said...

PM why is it that so many people can't grasp that simple point!

Bain was found not proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Quite how so many people misinterpret this as "proven Innocent" escapes me.

Callinan got it right, unlike that Canadian idiot, and Martin van Beynen sums up the report quite well: