Posts by Nobody Important
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
NI, nice one I try to call Craig on calling me a conspirationalist and you think it makes no sense?
Yes, I'm a bad parent. When two children start yelling at each other I just tell them both to shut up, when I should really listen to each of them explain themselves and then judge who is in the right.
Seriously, what I meant by my comment is that when two people go at eachother most people (not involved) have a look-see but then move on. If you think the rest of us are going to follow every comment like its a novel then you are mistaken; more so if you think we'll actually bother to click back a few pages to see how this brouhaha started and who's right. Most will just think 'I like Craig' or 'I like Ben' and support who they want.
Or not. It could just be me that's that shallow. I'm off to make dinner now. Mmmmm Chicken ....
-
__He doesn't know if his father killed them because he didn't see it either. The only way David would know who the killer was was if he was the killer, or saw the killer.__
You're missing one simple point. Either David or Robin is the killer. Therefore, if David knows he isn't the killer, he must know that Robin is, or vice-versa.Not necessarily Ron. A third person could have done it. We weren't there so we don't know. And I don't know every bit of evidence gathered or presented so I can't say otherwise - or who I think did it. Unless you insist __I take a punt ...
I lean towards the father doing it, but I'm troubled by the computer message. Why kill the whole family but spare David? What did he do to deserve leniency? Others have said the position of the rifle means the father couldn't have shot himself; but I'm willing to accept that either the cops moved it by accident or David did when he returned home but was in a fuzz and can't remember doing so.
I'm glad David got bail. I also think he should be retried so that his guilt or innocence can finally be proved (since all the new evidence the defence couldn't present at earlier trials finally can). I know this is expensive but if David is innocent he should be compensated but I don't think he should be until proven innocent.
If the Crown decide not to retry then there will be many who say he should be compensated for his 12+ years inside -- but how can he when he hasn't actually been found innocent? __But of course if he is retried and again found guilty I'l probably one of many looking at the jury and thinking WTF?
-
RB ~ truth be told most of us just skip those exchanges because they're 'too hard' and make no real sense ...
-
__If Weir had any 'entanglement' with Laniet__
1] Where has this development popped from? Has it been around a while?2] NI - the problem with that sort of evidence, is that there is no way of confirming if it is true. The ultimate in hearsay.
3] How would the policeman having an "entaglement" with laura make him predisposed to convict David?
1] RB said it in a comment, news to me too. I was picking up on RB's use of the word significant.
2] I agree. I love it when journos/ppl say 'the only one who knows what really happened was David Bain'. Bain knows one thing: his family are all dead. He doesn't know if his father killed them because he didn't see it either. The only way David would know who the killer was was if he was the killer, or saw the killer.
3] There have been many bad TV movies where a prostitute is found dead and the cop investigating her murder was also seeing her professionally. But he doesn't want this known so he wants the case closed quickly. I've no idea what the relationship was between Weir and Laniet, but as I said, a witness did come forward and tell the Police that Laniet was going to spill her guts about the prostitution and the incest. The defence believe this was the motive for the father killing the family. The Police discounted it. -
I've just been informed that this aint a scene, it's an arms race. So I guess Emo is some sort of revisionist Reaganite movement ....
-
I've just seen the poster for Brendan Lovegrove's new show. It's called The Emperors New Show so presumably its new material?!
I can't help wondering if we've all been sucked into some reverse viral marketing campaign for it. And why he would then still use old material for the Welly showcase ...__
-
Yes, and if it's shown that Milton Weir, the former police detective who investigated the Bain murders had significant undeclared entanglement with Laniet Bain, via her apparent prostitution, then that would be of concern.
So if Weir had an 'entaglement' with Laniet but it wasn't 'significant' then it's okay? Sheesh. Does the spin start here?
A witness came forward prior to Bain's arrest and said Laniet told him she was going to come clean with her family about the prostitution and the incest. The police dismissed this witness' statement and made David the principal suspect, not the father - who was the original suspect.
If Weir had any 'entanglement' with Laniet then the Bain case really does stink to high heaven ...
-
orget Hagar, when is someone going to tie Nick Watson into this?
Of course it would be funnier if I'd managed Nicky Watson.
-
The most recent audited circulation for Investigate is 8212 and its readership (ie: anyone who sees a copy in a month) is 68,000 - so it has quite a high pass-on rate. My guess is that its notoriety helps greatly with the readership number (ie: high name-recognition), less so with actual sales.
The readership is high possibly because of all the free copies they distribute. I see it at dentists, doctors, and takeaway bars everywhere.
I wonder if anyone's spoken to ex-Otago coach, ex-cop and ex-All Black selector Gordon Hunter about the incident?
That would be a bit tricky, what with him being dead and all.Any tabloid journo worth his or her salt would find a way.
Is this some kind of weird vortex in the space-time continuum that's swallowed a copy of the Sunday Star-Times? When will Nicky Hagar be invoked?
Forget Hagar, when is someone going to tie Nick Watson into this? I bet that chap from 20/20 is racking his brains trying to find a way as we speak ....
-
I have been asked how I'm going to bring down the moral authoritay on my kids considering my own teenage years. And okay, I don't have a plan, but I'm not going to tell them that having teenage sex is going to ruin their lives forever, because it's demonstrably not true.
R R R R R!
I plan to tell my daughter (many many many many moons from now) that sex is OK as long as she's f#cking the guy -- and not the other way round (ie. she gets f#cked by him).