Hard News: Claims
431 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 9 10 11 12 13 … 18 Newer→ Last
-
Current wife? You still holding a candle for Natassja Kinski, Andrew? Very freudian slip...
Sorry, a typo, that should have read "current wives"
But how did you know about me & Nastassia?
-
Mr Wishart has also now accepted that Broad was not in the room when the film was shown.
although he notes that Igor & others recollect Broad sitting beside them watching it - didn't Igor claim to be so appalled he didn't watch it either?
Too many unsubstantiated allegations...
-
But how did you know about me & Nastassia?
I've seen Cat People. There's many of us been in that boat...
And in deference to Merc, can we call it Igour-gate? Pleeeeeese?
-
merc,
That'll definitely cost ya, Merc Productions is having a bad week.
-
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 ...
-
NI, there is a large difference between 'entanglement' and entanglement, surely.
-
If Weir had any 'entanglement' with Laniet
Where has this development popped from? Has it been around a while?
-
NI - the problem with that sort of evidence, is that there is no way of confirming if it is true. The ultimate in hearsay.
-
How would the policeman having an "entaglement" with laura make him predisposed to convict David?
-
In that case, Don, could we hazard a quess that National is mixed up in here somewhere?
No, I wouldn't make that point or accusation at all.
Politicians are not responsible for their sympathisers and I cannot see the Key / English team stooping to this in a million years. I am generally very impressed with the politicians I have met and heard across the spectrum in NZ. We are remarkably lucky with the calibre of the majority of our representatives and I would be proud to have either front bench represent us even if there was quibbling on individual policies.
That is why I find this sort of thing concerning, it changes the nature of NZ political debate for the worse.
-
Hmmm.....it isn't uncommon for an organisation to have a shadow organisation, "not connected", to pursue those things which need to be officially denied - I've seen it myself (not in a political party). Not that I'm saying that national does such things.....
-
And Craig if you don't think it's an issue who is paying you, how come the EB's donations dragged Don down?
Merc:
Look, I've made my position on conspiracy theories about who finances Investigate perfectly clear - and I'm going to fucking have a stroke of those chinless, scarf-wearing weirdos get trotted out for another go-round as a fashionable bogeyman.
Perhaps I need to say this in tiny words: Wouldn't wipe my arse with a copy of Investigate, and if I was on the receiving end of a Wishart smear job I wouldn't give a damn if his shitty rag was being personally financed by God Almighty Himself.
Crystal?
-
so how about, next time you see one in such a situation, how about you take it away and put it in the recycling bin? i'll promise to do the same... unless this can be proven as theft? is it theft if you throw a way a free copy?
Otago Student magazine Critic got a very informal legal opinion on this in the mid-90s (informal as in, they phoned up a law lecturer and got an answer) when a whack job who had submitted a letter to the editor, and then went up to the Critic office after it had gone away to print demanding that they withdraw the letter (to which they said "too late"), grabbed a trolley and collected almost every copy of the newspaper on campus and ran away with them.
The opinion they got was that it was theft. Just because something doesn't cost anything, doesn't mean that it doesn't have value, both to the people who it would be given to, and to the people who produce it. It was also affecting the business of the publishers and the advertisers who have paid to be in the paper.
He was eventually convinced of this and handed over the bundles of precious newspapers.
-
Perhaps I need to say this in tiny words: Wouldn't wipe my arse with a copy of Investigate, and if I was on the receiving end of a Wishart smear job I wouldn't give a damn if his shitty rag was being personally financed by God Almighty Himself.
Crystal?
Er... I'm not sure I get your drift. Maybe don't sugar it up so much, & tell us what you really think?
-
__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. -
Hmmm.....it isn't uncommon for an organisation to have a shadow organisation, "not connected", to pursue those things which need to be officially denied - I've seen it myself (not in a political party). Not that I'm saying that national does such things.....
Not at all, John... Liberal columnist Michael Kinsley's assessment of the first President Bush comes to mind: "Lacking the courage of your nastiness doesn't make you nice." At least Wishart doesn't sugar coat his malice, which is about the only nice thing I'll ever say about the man.
-
I also know one of the officers [Ellis case] involved was accused of having an affair with one of the mothers in the case
Colin Eade. Though you don't really need the "accused of". And the "one of" is selling him short also.
Otago Student magazine Critic got a very informal legal opinion on this in the mid-90s
I had not heard that story. These student newspapers with their no institutional memory,
-
I strongly recommend that anyone who is interested in this listens to the following Morning Report interviews. The first one, with Howard Broad confirms that the police did react to problems with the sex ring inquiry, although apparently not with criminal charges.
The second one, with Joe Karam, explains some of the issues with Laniet's phone and diary, which do seem to beggar belief.
http://podcast.radionz.co.nz/mnr/mnr-20070514-0721-David_Bain-064.mp3
For the record, I support Howard Broad, and think Helen Clark's reaction to the accusation against him is exactly right. Similarly, the referral of the complaints to the Police Complaints Authority is, in my view, exactly the right thing to do.
-
ron,
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.
-
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. I've worked with people who could twist reality until they came out the winners and they truly, truly 'remembered' their distortions as being the truth. They weren't lying - but they were wrong all the same. David Bain may (and frankly I have no opinion either way) be innocent, or he may believe that he is innocent. But belief doesn't have to be correct.
-
Now what we need, to tie this all together nicely, is to hear that David Bain was at the party on the night of the chicken.
David is to young, but his dad on the otherhand ....
It's time to call in Mystery Inc, get Scooby on the case.
-
Peter Gibbons has just had an interview on checkpoint - he is quite clear, that Idour brought the film, would not stop the screening, and was left to view it by himself. His opinion of Wishart's article, and those who believe it, is stinging. The audio might be up on the RNZ website.
-
good work tony. having scooby there may well lure out the owner of the film...
"mmm... great dane"
-
Which came first, the chicken or the...?
ahahaha!
-
Mr Wishart has also now accepted that Broad was not in the room when the film was shown.
Pardon? This story does seem to be falling down around his ears.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.