The reason you could understand the peacocks is because they were trying to impress upon you the ability to steal your daughter away from being afraid of them
"You're watching a true crime show, grim is what you're all about!" Simon, I literally just watch any video you put out, I never even thought about true crime until you made this channel.
For me it’s the opposite, I watched some lawyer react videos, that lead to true crime, which quickly lead to Simon and now I watch his other channels too lol. It might be entertainment, technically, but he seems genuine about his thoughts which I really appreciate too.
@@liamevans7661yeah I had originally began on interrogation videos with psychological commentary like JCS before realizing how fascinating true crime is. I quickly branched out into other channels that discussed crimes, but I think I'd found Simon from Biographics & branched into his commentary channels from there because he had a polished English accent & I wondered how eloquent he'd sound on other topics as well. Watching him screw around & riff with Danny, Emma, Kevin, Dave, Sam, etc. on Brain Blaze & Decoding the Unknown solidified me as a Simon Whistler fan & not just a fan of his channels. But I also happen to be interested in crime, biographies, unsolved mysteries, war atrocities, debunking conspiracies, & the like so he caters to my interests anyway 🫡
You may be puzzled by the cops hiding in their car, concerned about an active shooter. This was because a few years before this there had been a multiple fatality shooting in a small township on the opposite of Dunedin, where the shooter deliberately targetsed the police. It's called the Aramoana massacre. Also, at this time the only armed police officers in New Zealand were the Armed Offenders Squad. The rest did not have firearms on their persons or in their vehicles.
Unless I missed it, I can't help but notice that the angle of the bullets entry into Robin's brain was never mentioned. This would have told the prosecution two things: 1) Whether or not the wound was self inflicted and 2) the height of the person that did it if it wasn't self inflicted.
Not necessarily. Robin could still have his head straight and push the trigger. I've thought of that too. He may have tilted his head to get that extra reach. But what if he didn't have to? Or what if David held the gun a little lower. Giving the same angle that would still be similar to suicide. David can bend his knees and then pull the trigger. Putting the gun on a different angle.
@@mvb88even in that case the chances that the gun ends upright on its narrow side is very slim. I wouldn’t say that it’s zero but given that when people die they tend to just drop the gun would have ended up falling as well and end up on its flat side.
Fun fact, I'd been toying with the idea of applying to write scripts for Simon a short while back and the Bain case was the one I'd intended to cover as a New Zealander myself with some preexisting familiarity with the case. I didn't end up pursuing that however, so to see the case covered here is a pretty interesting thing for me. It's an excellent script, I certainly have doubts as to whether I could have done it better even with the advantages I had. Great work as always Casual Criminalist team!
I feel you but for Quebec cases. We have one of the worst cult leader in history having been here. A cardiologist who killed his 2 kids to make his wif suffer get out and more. Personally I started thinking of it for rotten mango but I think I like the delivery of cases more here. Less dramatic, more to the point, less of a feeling of fake sympathy.
I've also been contemplating a script-writing application, and the case I'm considering is one very local to me. It's about the murder of a Dutch girl named Marianne Vaatstra in 1999, and it took 13 years to find the killer in a pretty interesting manner. There's a lot of interesting stuff surrounding the case, and includes a well-known Dutch crime reporter who's been involved in the investigation of a litany of other high-profile cases, each of which would make for a good episode itself. (Plus, he himself was assassinated a couple of years ago, the act very likely related to a massive on-going case with its own bizarre twists and turns). The main thing holding me back is the amount of research I would have to do and in particular how to actually perform that research to get all the factual details and none of the sensationalized crap.
I would love to see one on the heavenly creatures girls! You should do it. I was talking to friend the other day how messed up it was that high school students were all studying it for english classes, and how we all didn't just get ideas for knocking our parents off.
The only thing that in my opinion proves David's guilt is his strained relationship with his father and the weird message left on his computer. There's just no reason for Robin to do that and in cases where the dads kill their entire family, they usually wait for the people to come back and kill them too. It just looks like David did it and then the police incompetence was the reason he got acquitted again allegedly
Dads are literally the example of family annihilators (Chris Watts, Anthony Todt, Xavier Dupont de Ligonnès) so it just is so unlikely that Robin would do it and leave one
@@abbyburtenshaw8200 Exactly! Like would a man who planned on killing himself really bother with hiding evidence? Not really. It's just SUPER suspicious and I wish the police were diligent about keeping, filing and testing the evidence. A killer really walked away in my opinion
Honestly it’s his behavior afterwards, only guilty people pretend to be insane. But legally I agree with the outcome, the cops effed up. they didn’t get the evidence needed to convict. I can’t believe they didn’t get body temps, that’s basics 101 forensics for establishing a timeline.
@@abbyburtenshaw8200 Hard to say, however IF I was in his place, I'd want someone else to take the reputation fall and have me be remembered as an innocent victim despite being a cold hearted killer. If my spouse turned my kids against me, and I ultimately decided to end myself, painting one of them as guilty would be revenge from the grave. David, being the only one out of the house early in the morning, would be the perfect yet unfortunate scapegoat. Then again, I could just be a sociopath and the odd one out here. Allegedly.
I clicked on this video so fast! I live in NZ and when I was in high-school David Baine moved to that small town. Everyone was terrified but I didn't know the details of what had happened. Thank you Casual Criminalist team, this was very thorough!
It happened before I was born but I remember the media circus that followed his release! It’s weird listening from Dunedin as an adult hearing all these familiar places!
I feel bad for David's kids. Imagine finding out your dad named you after his siblings who had been murdered, in cold blood, and that there's a strong possibility that he did it?!
What kind of woman would marry him? Granted that he might be guilty or innocent, he looks creepy, and he has very creepy beliefs either way. What kind of woman looks at all of that, and figures it's fine?
@@Hollylivengood But what does a Murderer look like? You think hes creepy, but im sure people probably look at you and think oh you're creepy you are a murderer. I dont believe he killed his family, probably his Dad but not the rest of his family
I listened to this on my podcast app over the weekend and I have to say I was pretty firmly against the son the entire time. His malingering (faking it) when it came to the fits, and his injuries on the day of the event, and his statements to his girlfriend and others are much more powerful to me than the relatively minor objections raised on appeal. They got it right the first time.
I would just play devil's advocate for the "faking it". I'm a high anxiety person and if this happened to me I'd pretty much shut down. I'd still be conscious of what's going on around me but I would just want to sink into myself. It's very possible that that's what he did. Idk
@@sniperboom1202among other things I'm diagnosed with extreme anxiety disorder, for the most part I keep it under control mainly by not socialising, avoiding etc. I was diagnosed with Epilepsy in my teens but after a couple of confirmed seizures, they started happening way more regularly, lasting longer than an epileptic seizure should, ambulances called, EEG's, MRI's etc. I was diagnosed with A-Typical Seizures. They were originally called Pseudo-Seizures but due to people getting hassle for "faking" the name was changed to be more fitting. In my case? They're triggered by Anxiety & Pain (I have nerve damage) my brain literally switches off when I cant cope with social interactions, High levels of pain, combination of both. Although tbf, when they do happen I am unconscious, I don't properly react to things like a torch for example, tickling feet, standard "are you pretending" tests haha. The brain is fascinating & terrifying! That kids behaviour doesn't seem quite right honestly but under extreme stress, anxiety &/Or a potential mental health condition on top? Not a lot would surprise me!
It's just our justice system. They proved that it was possible for the dad to have done it. That was enough to get him off. David just didn't get paid out because to be paid out for a wrongful conversation. You have to prove without a doubt your innocent. He just proved it was possible someone could of done it.
but they didn't, the police completely fumbled all the evidence at every step of the way. even if he was guilty, they basically destroyed any way to prove it
My biggest issue with this comes with that message on the computer. “Sorry. You are the only one who deserved to stay”. If we assume the “robin did it” series of events is correct, why would he say this to David? By every account the 2 hated each other and fought often. So the wife has to die and (again, ASSUMING the incest story was true) the one daughter has to die, the other 2 kids didn’t “deserve to stay”? Doesn’t make much sense even if we assume robin did it after suffering a psychotic break. One shoe I was kinda surprised never dropped was what if the mother had something to do with it? Considering she believed not just her husband but her kids all had “the devil inside them” it’s not uncommon we hear stories about how these kinds of religious control freaks would rather kill them to “save their souls” than let them go. THIS IS JUST MY SPECULATION but what if the mother put David up to this? Filled his head with these ideas till he just snapped. Cause that message would make a lot more sense coming from the mother rather than the father. I just found it interesting that she was this major controlling, dominant force in the household but once the murders happened she was basically never considered anything more than a victim of either David or robin.
I think the reason the mother wasn’t considered is because they determined the father was the last to die. So he either had to have done it or the one left alive did it. Personally, I think there is overwhelming evidence that David did it.
Yeah, it was such a long lead about her descent into madness and then it was forgotten. David is already kinda crazy, it seems very possible he took in his mothers ideas along with controlling behavior and it helped in his snapping.
@@mikusheadphones that just raises more questions. The main one being what’s the motive? The best the defense could come up with was the classic “family is falling apart so he would rather end everyone then let them go” but from what we know robin wasn’t even in control of the family at any point and there was a concerted effort to push him out. Psychotic break is the next best motive but he retains enough mental stability to try and frame his son who was out of the house at the time? Why? If he’s already killing the whole family, why let the son live? They hated each other. It just doesn’t make sense.
Exactly what I was thinking. Just to speculate i believe that it is very possible the 20 extra mins was due to him moving the gun to his father's hands out of his mother's (wiped down).. and possibly even just checking on his siblings. I am basing this on the theory that maybe him & his mother discussed killing the father only. So he was in fact shocked to come home to everyone dead (maybe even not anticipated that day). It's just that the message doesn't seem like robin as much as Margaret. David would also protect his mother's image. The only thing that i cannot figure out is the "black hands" part, seems very significant. Only mentioned inferences about black hands is washing the ink from his hands. (Which btw would mean he did not wear the gloves that day, though idr if that was speculated)
I’ve read about this case before and I still believe David was guilty of unaliving his family. I think the totality of the evidence was quite overwhelming but the handling of the case and the poor collection and preservation of the evidence was sloppy and allowed him the wiggle room to get away with it. However it’s far more common for guilt to be established through an abundance of circumstantial evidence than a ton of forensic evidence. Real life rarely happens as shown on tv in crime shows. Unfortunately people’s expectations are based more on fiction than reality and common sense.
Okay just barely starting, nowhere near the drama and that but before we take the nosedive into family murder horror I just got to say Simon peacock dream just made me smile. I always love the little glimpses of personality we get With him think that’s why I love this channel so much. It helps a lot seeing his reactions and having the little randomness and asides. Okay got that out. Now I’ll go back to the video and switch from a cute random dream about communicating with wise peacocks into the standard nightmare fuel.
I drove past where the old house used to be this morning, wild to see it in this channel. Lots of good mysteries to be told from our shores. Looking forward to seeing more
One common misconception about circumstantial evidence: any evidence that is not a direct observation of the crime being committed is considered circumstantial, and circumstantial evidence is *not* weak evidence. You compile multiple sources of evidence together to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and a preponderance of circumstantial evidence is typically sufficient to paint a vivid picture of the scene as it occurred. That said, why the actual hell did they allow the scene to be burned so soon after the murders, then discarded the case files after his initial conviction? That seems very sloppy, and it fuels theories about cover-ups or railroading. They had to know this guy would appeal, and forensics were advancing pretty quickly through the 90s-00s, why not preserve the scene to reexamine later with better tech? Or even just to refer back to the scene itself rather than photos. This whole case is really bizarre.
Back in the day, the NZ police were pretty cowboy about things - once they found the person they thought was the perp, they'd absolutely laser focus in in an effort to get a conviction, without properly considering the situation at large. The David Bain case isn't the only high-profile miscarriage of justice either: the Arthur Allan Thomas and Peter Ellis convictions were two other high-profile cases where the police used dodgy or outright fabricated evidence in their trials. Regardless of the guilt of David Bain, the first trial had such poor due dilligence that they made it more or less impossible to guarantee a clean conviction, hence the controversy around it to this day
@@mitchellhenderson3476 yea, seems like exceptionally sloppy policework even if he 'was' guilty, there is just no way to know after the severe mishandling of the evidence and situation at large
Gotta admit I'm kinda shocked Simon is so forgiving of officers not noticing whether or not the washing machine was on when they arrived. To the crime scene. That's full of bodies. With blood everywhere. The lone survivor surrounded by the aforementioned blood and bodies. Pretty sure step one in the handbook for such situations (after ensuring the survivor is not a threat) is to preserve the scene and stop any cleaning from going on.
Let’s not forget they were outside for a time, before going in. Chances are the washing machine was already done. Step one isn’t gathering evidence. It’s securing the scene.
Idk. Unless the officers were barging in as the washing machine was initially filling with water, I don't believe the officers would have succeeded in preserving any evidence out of that washing machine.
@@prussianhill maybe not but you can't just assume that. Especially with how far DNA technology has advanced since it was first used. Something that can't be detected now could very well be detected in the future
@@thetowndrunk988 I literally said step one after any threat is eliminated was preserving (aka securing) the scene. This would include any possible evidence being actively destroyed like washing clothes
Two ideas to spare Simon (a little): A, a segment about different forensic techniques, if they're actual science, famous cases that used the stranger ones (like canning air or ye old trial by water?). I know a lot of true crime watchers love blood, but I know some want to feel like they could solve the case. B, "The Morgue" where any previously covered case can have updates (naming based on "Dismembered Appendices"). This segment could maybe improve viewership of old videos because it would only be odds and ends that are more timely to the present day but lack the specifics of the past.
Wtf is canning air? Id love a simon video about weird forensic techniques. The morgue also sounds like a good idea, though since a lot of these cas crims are about old/settled cases im not sure how many there would need to be
Nearly 2 hours of Cas Crim to help me through work on Monday? Yes please!. This story was fascinating, I love hearing stories that might be not as well known. Listening to these when not knowing a thing about them gets my inner detective thinking and I get so much more into it. Thanks Simon, Emma, Chris, and the rest of the basement crew for all your fantastic work!
Long time subscriber - from Dunedin. Live in London. This, the Aramoana shootings and the Sophie Elliot case are big crime events from Otago. Was interested to hear how this script went! Great work Emma. You did well with the place name pronunciations too Simon. Taranaki
Fellow Dunedinite here 👋 Sophie Elliot was tragic. I remember that psycho that killed her, he was such an arrogant asshole & just made himself look like an even bigger fuckwit when in court. Sophie's mum I would often see around town & sadly she died not too long ago.
I was absolutely glued to this from beginning to end. Excellent writing, Emma! The story kept me on the edge of my seat as I hadn't heard of this case before today. Whenever I am aware that Casual Criminalist posts a new video I instantly press play no matter what As I am such a fan of the team of writers , editors and of course , Mr Simon Whistler, as it's always a pleasure. Thank you for another fantastic video !
Martin van Beyen has an excellent long podcast about this. He was at all of the trials and includes the interviews with the judges afterwards. He has no doubts that David killed them all. It’s a very compelling report.
@@rachelbarrie5359 Maybe they had a lively debate about the death penalty? Peacock: 't is better to have ten guilty go free than one innocent locked up Simon: put him in the chair!!
I lived in Dunedin for many years, and i remember one time i was trying on a vintage knitted jersey and the shop owner described it as "very David Bain"..... Needless to say i did not buy it and also wtf type of sales strategy is that
Fantastically well researched Emma, and good editing Chris. Love how Simon is so easily swayed by the presentation of the evidence; he'd be a nightmare on a jury 🤣🤣 I reckon that David did it, but the police were completely out of their depth and made mistakes.
If you want a chance at an acquittal or at least a mistrial, then you need Simon on your jury. He takes beyond reasonable doubt to the extreme. Of course, he also loves seeing criminals ounished with the chair, so if you did it, better hope the police screwed up something.
Great script, interesting situation. I still feel like it was most likely him, given all the details we were given about him. How controlling he was over siblings and the family, his strained relationship with his father (who apparently chose to spare him but also frame him before killing himself?) and his faked fits and even faking being unconscious when first picked up. And going out of your way to be noticed to try to give yourself an alibi, like happening to make the lady's dog bark for the first time in months and it just so happens to be the day everyone gets murdered. Oh, and the fact that he was the one that called the family meeting that made sure they would all be present. And how he knew more than he should have, and changed his story, what he told his aunt when he was staying with them...The guy is either guilty or went out of his way to look as guilty as possible. Granted, the whole family was doomed from the beginning. It seems like everyone in the family had their own problems that fed into each other and made a house so toxic it had to be burned to the ground. Burning it for real probably wasn't the best idea, at least that early. But I'm not sure what evidence they could have found to prove David's innocence, given that they were "the worst kind of hoarders". And also that he totally did it. Allegedly. He's lucky he was charismatic enough to convince a rugby player he was innocent, and that the police were as incompetent as police generally seem to be. But hey, it's not like we know any other murderers that happen to be charismatic or anything.
Yeah, and not to mention, he also had like semi confessions to his aunt and girlfriend. He knew information that wasn’t in the newspapers about where the bodies were. I know he changed his story in later said he must’ve seen them. but why would he ask why his brother had to struggle?
Also the fact that they’re mad that the police let the family burn down the house. Which fair they should have stopped them but they are not the ones who choose to burn down the house. I don’t know about you, but if there was anything that could help figure out what happened to my family I would not burn down the location.
I'm like 60% sure it's David Bain that did it, unfortunately that 40% is a rather significant chunk of doubt & definitely means I'm not "sure beyond a reasonable doubt". So if I was on the jury I would have to acquit David even though I'm 60% sure he did it. It really annoys me that the police f**ked up so majorly with allowing the house to be burnt & destroying evidence, as well as not even running some of the tests they DEFINITELY should have.
Yes. I also have the feeling that a killer was let go because of police incompetence. But of course we can never know. Which is why we do have to err on the side of caution and let him go.
Thank you so so much for covering this case, I was so hoping it would be picked up! The case is still a point of argument at dinner parties. Many thanks and appreciation from down here in Aotearoa.
lol I’m genuinely not trying to be condescending but the idea of discussing and debating a mass murder at a dinner party is just a hella funny image to me 😂
My first thought when reading the title was "oh no, Batman finally broke his most sacred rule" but then I realized I'm an idiot and that's the wrong Bane/Bain Edit: and there's a Robin in the story LMAO
Also the fact that he had defensive wounds and the fact that the way the gun was found shows that it was definitely placed there next to Robin. And the computer note sealed it for me. As if Robin, after murdering his family, would wait to start up his slow computer and write a note instead of on a piece of paper, especially for a son that hated him.
1:35 - Chapter 1 - The bain family 22:40 - Chapter 2 - The murders 37:05 - Chapter 3 - The murder trial of david bain 1:02:50 - Chapter 4 - The rugby player & the court of appeals 1:12:50 - Chapter 5 - The 2nd murder trial of david bain 1:29:25 - Chapter 6 - Aftermath 1:39:00 - Dismembered appendices
So awesome to see coverage and perspective on such a divisive and contentious case in my little old country of New Zealand! You did great on the the Māori language pronunciations too 👍🏼
I agree the prosecution is relying heavily on circumstantial evidence. So I think the question to ask yourself is when does enough circumstantial evidence pile up that you feel comfortable saying guilty?
The majority of cases are based on circumstantial evidence though. Unless there's direct evidence .( i.e a witness that happened to see the murder or some type video footage.) Any evidence found including forensics is circumstantial.
While that is a fair question, they definitely had way more than enough circumstantial evidence in this case. Also, they could have easily found some real evidence if the police just did a little bit of work.
Emma did a fantastic job with this script, i must say. I saw a different true crime channel's coverage of this story a little while ago and it couldn't hold a candle to this. It took me about 20-30 minutes of this ep to realize it was even the same case because of all the great in-depth background Emma gave on the family where the other channel gave zero and only told one version of the case (i.e. the David's guilty and framed his dad version) only giving half the facts. Well done Emma!
I can’t believe how rapidly Simon turned around on this one. I believe this guy is absolutely guilty, can’t believe how quickly Simon forgot about so much damning evidence from earlier in the episode.
I don't feel he did a full shift, just leaning from one towards the other. Personally, I'm not fully convinced he's innocent but, more importantly, his guilt hasn't been proven beyond a reasonable doubt either. I think Simon is looking at it the same way. One thing's for sure: the loss of evidence (allowing the house burned down and such) leaves so many unanswered questions. I found it baffling already the cops just decided to hang out the laundry on a crime scene.
This case is "Yes, David did it, but due to shoddy police work and debatable decisions by the judge, he should have been acquitted." So right outcome for justice, but technically the wrong outcome for due process.
I would put it the opposite way. Due process is why he went free, but it's not justice. Justice failed by not respecting due process, leading to reversal of the conviction.
It’s pretty well accepted that David did it and his release was pretty controversial. I was someone sympathetic as a kid watching his retrial unfold years later not really understanding the specifics of the case. As an adult it’s seemingly cut and dry what happened. There’s only so many circumstances you can explain away. Also a life sentence here is like 25 years it’s notoriously lax.
What if they both did it? (I apologize if this idea has already been proposed.) Hear me out: -Robin is a creep and abuses his daughter. -David is raised by an obsessive mother and a creep father, becoming rather creepy himself. -Robin hates his life and decides to off his family. -Daughter threatens to tell everyone about the abuse. This forces Robin's hand, and in a rush, he decides to get up in the morning and off everyone while they sleep. -That morning, Robin finds David up early and heading out the door. -It's then Robin decides to frame David. (Or maybe that was just the rushed plan all along.) -David comes home and goes about cleaning himself up in the dark. - David eventually realizes what happened and goes looking for everyone. -David finds Robin waiting. -An altercation ensues that results in Robin's death. -David whips up the "blackouts" so Robin's murder gets ruled a self deletion. There are probably holes in this idea, but it's still an interesting hypothesis to entertain. Also, I request a "gahd dayumn," counter. Have a great day yall!
Alternately: Robin kills Margaret over their marital issues, then himself out of guilt. David comes home, realizes his parents are dead, and kills his siblings so they don't have to face that, then writes the note to make it look like Robin killed all of them. There are plenty of possibilities and combinations of how it could have happened. I think this is a case where there was too much evidence that wasn't properly handled so we'll never know the truth.
The fact that he even got acquitted fucking bothers me. David Bain absolutely fucking did it. The police got sloppy because they thought they had locked it down.
Because they proved it was possible that the dad did it. It's designed so that guild people go to jail. Possible innocent people go free. I'm on the fence between Robin and David. It was one of the 2. Given where the gun was located. Plus the reports from friends and family (no fact. Just a rumor) Robin was banging his daughter and she was going to tell. So hard to say 100% what one did it.
I mean, good chance he did it. Shame they railroaded him if they didn't need to. Withholding evidence, allowing more evidence to be destroyed, etc.. 💩 job by the cops.
@@mvb88 I mean, #1 the rifle was *placed upright* on the ground next to Robin. Rifles do not naturally fall onto the ground upright, even if you drop it a few inches off the ground while it’s already upright. And a dead man with a bullet in his head isn’t going to gently place the rifle down. Even if the shot didn’t immediately kill Robin, when you sustain a mortal injury, your muscles tense up and them immediately loosen, resulting in the gun either being dropped if it’s heavy, or stuck in the hand if it’s light. This fact alone told me the gun was either tampered with after Robin shot himself, or someone else shot him. And seeing as David never mentions fooling around with the gun after coming home, I’d say that’s pretty damning on David’s part. Also, #2, there’s the fact that Robin and David did not get along. Davis hated his father, and wanted him gone long before this. If Robin were to spare any of his children from his murder suicide, David would probably be his last choice. The wording used in his supposed suicide note is extremely odd, and feels more like a narcissistic attempt to show how special David is compared to the rest of his family. “You are the only one who deserves to live.” Bullshit. #3, His father’s character may be disputed due to claims from one of his kids (and I don’t want to call the girl a liar because you never know, I’ll just mention there’s room for doubt. It could be completely true or false), but no one ever claimed he was violent with his family (I would classify SA as violence, but I’m specifically talking about physical abuse and threatening to kill). But David was. David had multiple reports of being extremely controlling, creepy, and downright scary. A friend of his even claimed (although I don’t believe there was ever concrete proof) that he planned the SA of a little girl. This claim, however, is supported by the numerous other claims from girls that he was creepy and unsettling. A person who plans out a SA is 100% capable of violence, that is, if this claim is true. There is obviously no definitive way to prove the guilt of either, and in the end, we will probably never know. However, I would say the the evidence really leans towards David being the killer, not a 50/50 chance of it being either. This whole thing is really a matter of shoddy police work and crappy preservation skills imo, whether David is guilty or Innocent.
@justalittleturtle5600 it's why I'm on the fence. There is evidence saying David did it. There is also evidence that says Robin did it. People who say Robin couldn't have done it because it's a rifle. It was proven that his arms are long enough. It would of been hard for him to do it but possible. Only thing that would answer the question is the angle of the bullet entering his head. If it goes in on a 90 degree angle. David did it. If it goes in on a angle going from bottom to top. He committed suicide. Given he'd move his head to get a bit more reach from his arm to get the trigger. If you think about that point. It would answer it. It shifts his shoulders over by a inch or 2. For me anyway. That alters the angel of his head next to the gun. So the bullet wouldn't enter at a 90 degree angle. But then David could of shot Robin in the head on the same angel. Only person who knows the truth is David. Either he's told the truth and he's innocent or he's lied to get out of jail and keep the money and property
I believe David did commit the murders. There is some forensic evidence that does point towards him, and all the evidence that could suggest it was actually Robin is very much up for interpretation at best. Then there's the stuff like the fake fits David had (which immediately stopped when that one dude told him to stop), as well as the fake unconsciousness. His claims of black-outs and then suddenly later remembering how he did actually wander around the house and see his dead siblings after his story was found to be inconsistent is highly suspicious as well. But probably the biggest red flag for me is the statement from the woman who woke up from David doing his paper route and waking her up. She had asked him not to alarm her dog, and he gracefully conformed to her wish. Then exactly that morning, he goes on his paper route and conveniently 'forgets' about this and wakes her up. Absolutely reeks of establishing an alibi. Except it's been confirmed he went on his route earlier than usual. However. The way the case was handled by police, railroading David, withholding potential evidence that could suggest a different version of events, and subsequently letting the house get burned down, the gathered evidence to be destroyed, and making stuff up in court (i.e. the glasses lense in the photo). Plus the actual evidence itself also being up for interpretation ... I do think David should have been acquitted in the first place. Guilt beyond reasonable doubt and all that. I firmly believe in the idea of rather having 10 guilty people go free than having 1 innocent person wrongfully convicted. And nothing about this case screamed 100% certainty to me.
One thing not mentioned: how did Robin shoot himself with the rifle? Given the length of the rifle, and the additional length of the suppressor, it would have been very awkward to hold it to his head and even pull the trigger. I doubt his arms were be long enough, so did he use his toe to activate the trigger?
@@Spicypoptart1 no they didn't. See how David got off in the retrial. So much evidence that should of been taken. Wasn't taken. So cops couldn't prove Robin didn't do it. So it put in in that Robin could just reach the trigger. Would of been very hard to reach but posable.
David had the most motive. Many things were not allowed into either of his trials....one was that he was obsessed with Arawa and used to steal underwear from her drawers and hide them in his. Arawa was aware of this. She was scared of David and how possessive he was with her. She was not allowed to go anywhere unless he drove her and he drove her everywhere. She wasn't allowed to visit friends after school so the friends used to visit her at home - two sisters were her close friends. That was until the sisters mother met David for the first time and she got such a bad feeling she would not allow her daughters to visit Arawa's home anymore, but she was welcome to visit their house and stay over any time. So Arawa planned to do so but he objected in front of the friends mother and refused, so the mother stepped in and told David in no uncertain terms that Arawa would be coming to stay at their house overnight. David grudgingly gave in and he drove Arawa to the friends home telling her he'd be there to pick her up in the morning. He arrived before 6am before the family was even up. He had to wait in the car while Arawa had breakfast with the family. David was seething. That last weekend, Arawa had been with her friend to look at flats to rent and David was aware of this. He was about to lose control over his obsession (Arawa). She was leaving home because she was scared of David and because she wanted to escape the general chaos of her home and the dysfunction and toxic atmosphere. David was not going to allow her to leave. Later when his Aunt was planning the funerals David tried to take over and decide what every dead victim was going to wear and what music would be choses for them. He wanted Arawa to wear a push up bra.......and her music was to be Queen's "Who wants to live forever". The Aunt told him all of this was inappropriate and David stomped out in anger. Thank God he was arrested before the funeral because it would have been a circus and all about David. Also by this time David was on the outs with his mother and he came to find there would be no room for him in the new house. Younger brother Stephen was the new favorite and Mummy was building a special rom for her and Stephen....it was very incestuous sounding, and David would have to sleep elsewhere or in the caravan.........also David had fantasies about raping women joggers, saying how he could use his paper route as an alibi.....he told friends of this fantasy, but it was not allowed to be related in court. They miss half the information.....
I used to flat with a guy whose Father as a high ranking cop in NZ, he was in charge of re-investigating cold cases when new technology became available. He would pop round for a beer every now and then, I asked him about this case and he told me the police who did the crime scene initial investigation had cut a couple of corners that left some evidence inadmissible. One of those pieces of evidence was a journal of David’s that outlined his plan to rape a female jogger he used to see on his paper rounds and his strategy to avoid prosecution - it read exactly as the one he used when asked about the murder of his family.
Hi from New Zealand!!! I've been a regular watcher of ur various channels for like 5 years now and here we are again. Though I'm not sure being on this chanel is something to be proud of 😅
Hi! I’m from the home town of where this took place and you explained the detail of this so well. I’m a long time listener and so stoked to see you cover this case!!
I would like to highlight something: Robin had a routine where he prayed.... How many pray with their eyes closed? Getting close, without being noticed, in that situation doesn't seem difficult.
Growing up in NZ this was really good to get the recap of all the events. I hadn't heard about the mother being 'away with the fairies'. The impressions I remember of the case were the coverage including David's awful sweaters, after his not-guilty second trial people threatening petitions for him to get back his paper route, and to join Dancing with the Stars!
Maybe I missed something but why would Robin wipe down the gun? Especially if he's a) about to kill himself and b) wrote his son an absolution letter? And if it didn't even have Robin's fingerprints on it, who wiped it after he offed himself? Please explain what I'm missing.
In 1994 it took longer than 2 minutes to boot up (start up) a computer it took several minutes between turning it on and being able to run programs. It also took quite a while to open programs. So it had to be after David returned to the house that the message was typed. So if David did not type it someone was alive when he returned.
which makes me think that maybe robin killed his family… probably intended to kill david too… but david, after discovering his dead family, got the better of his father… that would also explain if robin changed clothes… because he thought he would be the sole surviver… but still the message itself doesn’t make much sense… but robin might have had a weird story lined up to “explain” it… which david didn’t
Thanks to Emma for the thorough script and equally thorough research on this case. I had heard of this case before, but this is the first coverage I've found with this level of detail. I also grew up on a farm, and when I was in high school my dad was a partner in a meat shop where I worked my last couple of summers before graduating. I'm now older than either of my parents were when I finished high school, and this realization terrifies me. 🤣
I remember studying a media class in university. In one of our courses, we went to Australia and New Zealand to study a bit about their media but to mostly see the effects of American media on other, English speaking cultures. We were told to read about crime that had been reported. I came across a book about the Parker-Hulme Murder in Christchurch. I remember, although being a (true) crime buff, that the case bugged me and weirded me out. I'd love to see an episode here about that!
Jury members hugging David and attending a party in his honor is a red flag. I'm surprised that the prosecution didn't retry the case based on possible jury misconduct. In regards to the case, David's guilt / innocence, would've only determined whether or not he would be compensated. If he was found guilty (for a second time), wouldn't he get time served? He had already served the minimum by the start of second trial.
THIS! How is this ok? Shouldn't jurors be impartial? When they show such favoritism it should be another retrial. And it was not only one juror, it was at least a couple.
@@ildisiri YES I have always believed that David did it, seeing the jury members hugging David after the trial and attending his party left a sour taste in my mouth
@@abbyburtenshaw8200 I am not sure what this case was about, but if it was for the young man that probably killed his entire family but was exonerated then I am rly glad to see that other people think the same!
Why would Robin confess on the computer and tell David that he deserved to live, and then wash clothes and attempt to clean the crime scene to obfuscate his own guilt, all the while making David look suspicious? There’s no reason for that.
Coincidentally I watched the lipstick killer episode right before this one and it just makes you frustrated seeing a man who was most definitely possibly innocent go to prison for life and then seeing David Bain totally guilty (allegedly in my opinion) go free
Kia ora from Wellington, New Zeland! So glad you're covering this. This case was a big deal here. Despite the final outcome, there are still people on both sides of the fence of who dunnit. Quite impressed with your pronouciation too Simon 😂.
As a New Zealander I'm course interested in this case, but could never be bothered reading any of the books on the subject. Thanks for providing an in depth alternative!! :D
The complete lack of any actual clinical psychology in this case is staggering. Dismissing the sisters claim her rather regularly raped her, with multiple separate corroborations, as "attention seeking" just because she had blurted out a confession as a young girl to a authority figure; shows how incompetent the prosecution was. I legit gasped out loud when the PE teacher said he had not believed her because he didn't see any visible scars. And then I absolutely couldn't believe that THAT was used as evidence that she was making stuff up. Also, they basically just put Robin aside as a possible suspect in the incest and murder case because he was a frail older man, and good in his community??? The kid who managed to fight off the attacker, after being shot in the hand, and had his head grazes, was 14!!!!! That's like a kid!!! And apparently he was able to struggle for a good bit? Oh god. There's nothing like the justice process that can remind me that the stigma around abnormal behaviors, mental health conditions, and its role in criminal events is like 50 years behind everything else.
I don't understand where the rest of the family was on all this. The aunt and uncle take David in after this happens but they had to know that the situation at that house was a hot mess. No one called social services when Margaret started saying all of her children were possessed by the devil. I mean talk about an alarm bell for mental illness and family annihilation. So many missed warnings in this entire case.
Ha, I knew we were the same age from previous videos but not how close (my bday is on the 1st xD). Great video as always, what a mystery! No wonder it's divisive even to this day!
While we're on the topic of controversial New Zealand murder cases, you should do the disappearance of Ben Smart and Olivia Hope. Another case that may or may not be a wrongful conviction, and it ended in a murder conviction without their bodies ever being found.
I can't believe I've been watching Simon for over a decade this is the strangest one-sided friendship I have ever had because Simon and I, on the same page.
Me when they are a nice newlywed Kiwi couple: aw, they seem lovely. Me when we find out they stopped bathing their kids, got deeper into Christianity, and got deeper into the indigenous religion and started imitating the social structures: oh shit. BTW: When I lived in China, I met some Zimbabweans who had spent several years in Papua New Guinea. It is *stunningly* beautiful and has some of the best scuba sites in the world.
Great NZ Pronunciation! I live twenty minutes from where this all went down, in a town called Aramoana. Might see that place on a future casual criminalist too!
Simon talking about his vivid ass dream in this video made me laugh, because I had a vivid dream last night (I know Simon probably filmed this in January) where I was renting a room from Simon (which Simon renting rooms to people in his house would likely be a nightmare for Simon) or Simon was my landlord for some reason, and he'd just keep plugging his sponsors whenever we'd talk like our general convos also required the occasional ad break. We're talking about the rental terms and halfway in there is a break to talk about Vessi for example. I woke up laughing when I realised how random the dream was. Also just putting out there the head canon version of real life Simon and his Wife were lovely people to know and I love that is even the impression my subconscious mind thinks of Simon from the impression we get of him from his videos
Thrilled to catch the Matt Orchard quote, his channel is brilliant and I reckon CasCrim fans will enjoy it. Equally thrilled at the prospect of Emma cultivating some rugby beef. Thank you Emma for these dual gifts.
I don’t remember all the details of when this happened but when talking about this it’s always been a debate between David and the father being responsible, never mentioning the bat shit crazy mother. Am a New Zealander and this still comes up on occasion.
I know all the evidence between David and Robin but just like you. I didn't know the mum was a bitch. That would kinda prove Robin did it. Having a wife like that. Then off the kids because they knew who did it and didn't want them to live with that. David wouldn't of known. But in saying that. Having a mum like that. Maybe David snapped.
Imo they over corrected and David is guilty. It will never make sense that the father decides to commit family annihilation but leaves alive David, the kid who gave was the most like his mother and gave him the most grief.
3:43 I remember being maybe 10, having a spirited, friendly debate with my dad. Mom got very upset and told him that she had always been so nervous at his “fights” with his siblings (who lived far enough away that this had never been worth addressing, I assume). That he was starting this with me was… and cue 2 neurodivergents who are very confused. Dad said that he was not angry with me, and was indeed extremely proud whenever I gave aa strong counter to his point. I have actually had very few fights with him in my entire life in part because I have always known that he can accept a conclusion different than his if I have reasoning behind it. Doesn’t mean that he never tells his little sister (they had horrible parents and has reversed our names since I was a newborn and she was 25 because apparently “younger girl I take care of” fit both of us so well) or me we should do x and does shocked Pikachu face when we go “the brain you encouraged me to use says y better fits my situation” but still. Mom did eventually see that both of us (and Auntie when she became a regular character) were relaxed and enjoying our debates. Always left us too it, though. She was more of a “be diplomatic and avoid controversy to keep the peace” type as her entire family tended to model (it wasn’t a trauma response)
Awesome script as always Emma. I watch a telamovie thing on UA-cam but you always wonder how much of those facts are true. I know how much research you put into writing the scripts so I don't even have to think about what's true and what's not
@@juliamcwilliam Thank you! And yes, it frustrates me to no end when people add their own spin to the case. I recently wrote a script where the most popular true crime book on the case is at least 25% fictional since the author just added his own version of events
Took awhile to watch this episode. Thank you for the long script. My favs are the episodes I doze off too... Can doze off too. Then I have to rewatch, with my morning coffee.
Fun fact: Murdering someone while sleepwalking is rare but possible. In the event that it happens the defense is declared not guilty because of temporary insanity.
When I started watching, the likes were at 542, now they're at 1.1k in 2 hours. Great script as always, and surprisingly few tangents by Simon this round.
I mean, no matter what you think we can all agree cops did a terrible job. Why didn't they test Rileys hand for gun powder? If neither of them had residue, there's only one that could've washed his hands 😅
Simon i love your work, I live in new zealand and remember the case well your brilliant script writer did a amazing job on this more information than id seen before. There a couple of other unsolved murders here. Ie the Crewe murders in the early 70s
@Madmij I know what you mean , but autocorrect has tripped you up. You actually mean" segue." Autocorrect must have changed it to Segway,LOL. It tried to change my reply too! Segway is that machine you stand on and it helps you move electronically. Segue is when a person takes the conversation off into a different direction.,which we all know and love Simon for doing. I believe you know this, you're just a victim of autocorrect. Haha
As a Kiwi i want to Thank you for covering this Simon. This was MASSIVE when I was at school. Good try with the NZ place names. The butchering you did of them, however, deserves their own Casual Criminalist episode, and Emma, as for the Rugby, Go to hell. ❤
I’d love Simon to cover the “Teacher’s Pet” case from Australia. I know the podcast of that name did the most in depth version of it I’ve seen but I’d love Simons take on it :)
Simon you should really do a video on Brenda Ann, the 1979 Cleveland Grover School shooter immortalised by Boomtown Rats ‘I don’t like Mondays’ after hear quote on why she killed her principal and fellow students with a 22LR
Computer timing..... The computer's clock was not referenced by the computer expert. He referenced a process in the operating system that shows the precise hours, minutes, and seconds, since the process started when the computer was booted up. It is this time that was subtracted from the men's wristwatches to estimate the time the computer was powered on. It's their watches that introduced the uncertainty, not the computer itself.
My new favorite Simon quote: "I'm a pretty self-centered person, but when you have kids, you have to pretend not to be!"
I chuckled at that one
At this point, we need these quotes wrote down in a book
@@haleyguthrie3113 like a notebook ;-)
The reason you could understand the peacocks is because they were trying to impress upon you the ability to steal your daughter away from being afraid of them
I felt that one. Lol
Chris the Editor back again to say, Go give Emma some love for the awesome script! Loved working on it, hope you folks enjoy it!
How do I find Emma's info to follow her or give her a compliment?
@@samanthaberchhere is fine, no?
Great video Emma, Chris and Simon.❤
Fantastic work as always, Chris!
@@nolan7743white knight are we
As a peacock myself, I can attest to the fact that we can, indeed, talk to Simon.
Would you agree that you are very wise?
*Screeches loidly.*
@@dark_baphometThey are considered extremely stupid amongst birds, like owls.
😂
Mep mep mep
"You're watching a true crime show, grim is what you're all about!" Simon, I literally just watch any video you put out, I never even thought about true crime until you made this channel.
Same
Same
For me it’s the opposite, I watched some lawyer react videos, that lead to true crime, which quickly lead to Simon and now I watch his other channels too lol. It might be entertainment, technically, but he seems genuine about his thoughts which I really appreciate too.
@@liamevans7661yeah I had originally began on interrogation videos with psychological commentary like JCS before realizing how fascinating true crime is. I quickly branched out into other channels that discussed crimes, but I think I'd found Simon from Biographics & branched into his commentary channels from there because he had a polished English accent & I wondered how eloquent he'd sound on other topics as well. Watching him screw around & riff with Danny, Emma, Kevin, Dave, Sam, etc. on Brain Blaze & Decoding the Unknown solidified me as a Simon Whistler fan & not just a fan of his channels. But I also happen to be interested in crime, biographies, unsolved mysteries, war atrocities, debunking conspiracies, & the like so he caters to my interests anyway 🫡
to the first three ppl on this thread, WELCOME. If you watched more than one of these videos, you ARE a true crime lover, you just outed yourself.
You may be puzzled by the cops hiding in their car, concerned about an active shooter. This was because a few years before this there had been a multiple fatality shooting in a small township on the opposite of Dunedin, where the shooter deliberately targetsed the police.
It's called the Aramoana massacre.
Also, at this time the only armed police officers in New Zealand were the Armed Offenders Squad. The rest did not have firearms on their persons or in their vehicles.
They made a movie about it called out of the blue
2006 😊
I've been to the memorial for the Aramoana massacre. Very shocking event.
very good context!
Unless I missed it, I can't help but notice that the angle of the bullets entry into Robin's brain was never mentioned. This would have told the prosecution two things: 1) Whether or not the wound was self inflicted and 2) the height of the person that did it if it wasn't self inflicted.
Yes, as others have mentioned, that and the absurd nature of shooting yourself in the head with a rifle with a suppressor attached were not covered.
Not necessarily. Robin could still have his head straight and push the trigger. I've thought of that too. He may have tilted his head to get that extra reach. But what if he didn't have to? Or what if David held the gun a little lower. Giving the same angle that would still be similar to suicide. David can bend his knees and then pull the trigger. Putting the gun on a different angle.
@@mvb88even in that case the chances that the gun ends upright on its narrow side is very slim. I wouldn’t say that it’s zero but given that when people die they tend to just drop the gun would have ended up falling as well and end up on its flat side.
@@dandereninja4750 the gun wasn't. The magazine was.
yeah exactly. our cops arnt that great. i always believed it was robyn and he made david the scape goat......... there is so much more ......
Fun fact, I'd been toying with the idea of applying to write scripts for Simon a short while back and the Bain case was the one I'd intended to cover as a New Zealander myself with some preexisting familiarity with the case. I didn't end up pursuing that however, so to see the case covered here is a pretty interesting thing for me. It's an excellent script, I certainly have doubts as to whether I could have done it better even with the advantages I had. Great work as always Casual Criminalist team!
I feel you but for Quebec cases. We have one of the worst cult leader in history having been here. A cardiologist who killed his 2 kids to make his wif suffer get out and more. Personally I started thinking of it for rotten mango but I think I like the delivery of cases more here. Less dramatic, more to the point, less of a feeling of fake sympathy.
Ben Smart and Olivia Hope would be a good one to cover
I've also been contemplating a script-writing application, and the case I'm considering is one very local to me. It's about the murder of a Dutch girl named Marianne Vaatstra in 1999, and it took 13 years to find the killer in a pretty interesting manner. There's a lot of interesting stuff surrounding the case, and includes a well-known Dutch crime reporter who's been involved in the investigation of a litany of other high-profile cases, each of which would make for a good episode itself. (Plus, he himself was assassinated a couple of years ago, the act very likely related to a massive on-going case with its own bizarre twists and turns).
The main thing holding me back is the amount of research I would have to do and in particular how to actually perform that research to get all the factual details and none of the sensationalized crap.
@@ucheehQHolland sure has some interesting crimes stories! I wouldn’t mind to hear them retold by Simon on this channel! 🤌
I would love to see one on the heavenly creatures girls! You should do it. I was talking to friend the other day how messed up it was that high school students were all studying it for english classes, and how we all didn't just get ideas for knocking our parents off.
The only thing that in my opinion proves David's guilt is his strained relationship with his father and the weird message left on his computer. There's just no reason for Robin to do that and in cases where the dads kill their entire family, they usually wait for the people to come back and kill them too. It just looks like David did it and then the police incompetence was the reason he got acquitted again allegedly
Dads are literally the example of family annihilators (Chris Watts, Anthony Todt, Xavier Dupont de Ligonnès) so it just is so unlikely that Robin would do it and leave one
IF Robin Bain did it, then why didn't he make it completely obvious that he was the one who did it.
@@abbyburtenshaw8200 Exactly! Like would a man who planned on killing himself really bother with hiding evidence? Not really. It's just SUPER suspicious and I wish the police were diligent about keeping, filing and testing the evidence. A killer really walked away in my opinion
Honestly it’s his behavior afterwards, only guilty people pretend to be insane. But legally I agree with the outcome, the cops effed up. they didn’t get the evidence needed to convict. I can’t believe they didn’t get body temps, that’s basics 101 forensics for establishing a timeline.
@@abbyburtenshaw8200 Hard to say, however IF I was in his place, I'd want someone else to take the reputation fall and have me be remembered as an innocent victim despite being a cold hearted killer. If my spouse turned my kids against me, and I ultimately decided to end myself, painting one of them as guilty would be revenge from the grave. David, being the only one out of the house early in the morning, would be the perfect yet unfortunate scapegoat. Then again, I could just be a sociopath and the odd one out here. Allegedly.
I clicked on this video so fast! I live in NZ and when I was in high-school David Baine moved to that small town. Everyone was terrified but I didn't know the details of what had happened. Thank you Casual Criminalist team, this was very thorough!
It happened before I was born but I remember the media circus that followed his release! It’s weird listening from Dunedin as an adult hearing all these familiar places!
I feel bad for David's kids. Imagine finding out your dad named you after his siblings who had been murdered, in cold blood, and that there's a strong possibility that he did it?!
What kind of woman would marry him? Granted that he might be guilty or innocent, he looks creepy, and he has very creepy beliefs either way. What kind of woman looks at all of that, and figures it's fine?
@@HollylivengoodOne who is also creepy...?
That’s rough
@@Hollylivengood But what does a Murderer look like? You think hes creepy, but im sure people probably look at you and think oh you're creepy you are a murderer. I dont believe he killed his family, probably his Dad but not the rest of his family
@@caitlinobrien3828 True.
I listened to this on my podcast app over the weekend and I have to say I was pretty firmly against the son the entire time. His malingering (faking it) when it came to the fits, and his injuries on the day of the event, and his statements to his girlfriend and others are much more powerful to me than the relatively minor objections raised on appeal. They got it right the first time.
I would just play devil's advocate for the "faking it". I'm a high anxiety person and if this happened to me I'd pretty much shut down. I'd still be conscious of what's going on around me but I would just want to sink into myself. It's very possible that that's what he did. Idk
@@sniperboom1202among other things I'm diagnosed with extreme anxiety disorder, for the most part I keep it under control mainly by not socialising, avoiding etc.
I was diagnosed with Epilepsy in my teens but after a couple of confirmed seizures, they started happening way more regularly, lasting longer than an epileptic seizure should, ambulances called, EEG's, MRI's etc. I was diagnosed with A-Typical Seizures. They were originally called Pseudo-Seizures but due to people getting hassle for "faking" the name was changed to be more fitting.
In my case? They're triggered by Anxiety & Pain (I have nerve damage) my brain literally switches off when I cant cope with social interactions, High levels of pain, combination of both. Although tbf, when they do happen I am unconscious, I don't properly react to things like a torch for example, tickling feet, standard "are you pretending" tests haha.
The brain is fascinating & terrifying! That kids behaviour doesn't seem quite right honestly but under extreme stress, anxiety &/Or a potential mental health condition on top? Not a lot would surprise me!
It's just our justice system. They proved that it was possible for the dad to have done it. That was enough to get him off. David just didn't get paid out because to be paid out for a wrongful conversation. You have to prove without a doubt your innocent. He just proved it was possible someone could of done it.
but they didn't, the police completely fumbled all the evidence at every step of the way. even if he was guilty, they basically destroyed any way to prove it
@mvb88 Yeah... and? They still got it right the first time and then fumbled it.
My biggest issue with this comes with that message on the computer. “Sorry. You are the only one who deserved to stay”. If we assume the “robin did it” series of events is correct, why would he say this to David? By every account the 2 hated each other and fought often. So the wife has to die and (again, ASSUMING the incest story was true) the one daughter has to die, the other 2 kids didn’t “deserve to stay”? Doesn’t make much sense even if we assume robin did it after suffering a psychotic break.
One shoe I was kinda surprised never dropped was what if the mother had something to do with it? Considering she believed not just her husband but her kids all had “the devil inside them” it’s not uncommon we hear stories about how these kinds of religious control freaks would rather kill them to “save their souls” than let them go. THIS IS JUST MY SPECULATION but what if the mother put David up to this? Filled his head with these ideas till he just snapped. Cause that message would make a lot more sense coming from the mother rather than the father. I just found it interesting that she was this major controlling, dominant force in the household but once the murders happened she was basically never considered anything more than a victim of either David or robin.
I think the reason the mother wasn’t considered is because they determined the father was the last to die. So he either had to have done it or the one left alive did it. Personally, I think there is overwhelming evidence that David did it.
Yeah, it was such a long lead about her descent into madness and then it was forgotten. David is already kinda crazy, it seems very possible he took in his mothers ideas along with controlling behavior and it helped in his snapping.
Because he set his son up to be found guilty of Robin's crime imo
@@mikusheadphones that just raises more questions. The main one being what’s the motive? The best the defense could come up with was the classic “family is falling apart so he would rather end everyone then let them go” but from what we know robin wasn’t even in control of the family at any point and there was a concerted effort to push him out. Psychotic break is the next best motive but he retains enough mental stability to try and frame his son who was out of the house at the time? Why? If he’s already killing the whole family, why let the son live? They hated each other. It just doesn’t make sense.
Exactly what I was thinking. Just to speculate i believe that it is very possible the 20 extra mins was due to him moving the gun to his father's hands out of his mother's (wiped down).. and possibly even just checking on his siblings. I am basing this on the theory that maybe him & his mother discussed killing the father only. So he was in fact shocked to come home to everyone dead (maybe even not anticipated that day). It's just that the message doesn't seem like robin as much as Margaret. David would also protect his mother's image.
The only thing that i cannot figure out is the "black hands" part, seems very significant. Only mentioned inferences about black hands is washing the ink from his hands. (Which btw would mean he did not wear the gloves that day, though idr if that was speculated)
I’ve read about this case before and I still believe David was guilty of unaliving his family. I think the totality of the evidence was quite overwhelming but the handling of the case and the poor collection and preservation of the evidence was sloppy and allowed him the wiggle room to get away with it. However it’s far more common for guilt to be established through an abundance of circumstantial evidence than a ton of forensic evidence. Real life rarely happens as shown on tv in crime shows. Unfortunately people’s expectations are based more on fiction than reality and common sense.
Okay just barely starting, nowhere near the drama and that but before we take the nosedive into family murder horror I just got to say Simon peacock dream just made me smile. I always love the little glimpses of personality we get
With him think that’s why I love this channel so much. It helps a lot seeing his reactions and having the little randomness and asides.
Okay got that out. Now I’ll go back to the video and switch from a cute random dream about communicating with wise peacocks into the standard nightmare fuel.
I drove past where the old house used to be this morning, wild to see it in this channel. Lots of good mysteries to be told from our shores. Looking forward to seeing more
Hello hello fellow Dunedinite 👋😁
@@MrsGump kia ora
@@MrsGump wazzah from nelson wish i could say im a dunedinite but only lived there for maybe a year
@@johntunnage3098 I'll swap you - you live here (I'm right by the beach here too) & I'll move to Nelson!! My brother n his ex n kids live there 🙂
@@MrsGump house swap lol
hmm beach sounds nice , st kilda or ..... lol
One common misconception about circumstantial evidence: any evidence that is not a direct observation of the crime being committed is considered circumstantial, and circumstantial evidence is *not* weak evidence. You compile multiple sources of evidence together to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and a preponderance of circumstantial evidence is typically sufficient to paint a vivid picture of the scene as it occurred.
That said, why the actual hell did they allow the scene to be burned so soon after the murders, then discarded the case files after his initial conviction? That seems very sloppy, and it fuels theories about cover-ups or railroading. They had to know this guy would appeal, and forensics were advancing pretty quickly through the 90s-00s, why not preserve the scene to reexamine later with better tech? Or even just to refer back to the scene itself rather than photos.
This whole case is really bizarre.
Back in the day, the NZ police were pretty cowboy about things - once they found the person they thought was the perp, they'd absolutely laser focus in in an effort to get a conviction, without properly considering the situation at large. The David Bain case isn't the only high-profile miscarriage of justice either: the Arthur Allan Thomas and Peter Ellis convictions were two other high-profile cases where the police used dodgy or outright fabricated evidence in their trials.
Regardless of the guilt of David Bain, the first trial had such poor due dilligence that they made it more or less impossible to guarantee a clean conviction, hence the controversy around it to this day
@@mitchellhenderson3476 yea, seems like exceptionally sloppy policework even if he 'was' guilty, there is just no way to know after the severe mishandling of the evidence and situation at large
Yes, circumstantial evidence is often some of the best evidence.
Can I hire you Simon for a seance? I want to communicate with the peacocks
Gotta admit I'm kinda shocked Simon is so forgiving of officers not noticing whether or not the washing machine was on when they arrived. To the crime scene. That's full of bodies. With blood everywhere. The lone survivor surrounded by the aforementioned blood and bodies. Pretty sure step one in the handbook for such situations (after ensuring the survivor is not a threat) is to preserve the scene and stop any cleaning from going on.
Not a whole lot of murder going on in Dunedin at the time so it would have been a pretty overwhelming scene to attend.
Let’s not forget they were outside for a time, before going in. Chances are the washing machine was already done. Step one isn’t gathering evidence. It’s securing the scene.
Idk. Unless the officers were barging in as the washing machine was initially filling with water, I don't believe the officers would have succeeded in preserving any evidence out of that washing machine.
@@prussianhill maybe not but you can't just assume that. Especially with how far DNA technology has advanced since it was first used. Something that can't be detected now could very well be detected in the future
@@thetowndrunk988 I literally said step one after any threat is eliminated was preserving (aka securing) the scene. This would include any possible evidence being actively destroyed like washing clothes
Whenever the news gets me down I can always turn to Simon and his cheery delivery of atrocities to put me straight!
Thanks Simon! 👍
Two ideas to spare Simon (a little): A, a segment about different forensic techniques, if they're actual science, famous cases that used the stranger ones (like canning air or ye old trial by water?). I know a lot of true crime watchers love blood, but I know some want to feel like they could solve the case. B, "The Morgue" where any previously covered case can have updates (naming based on "Dismembered Appendices"). This segment could maybe improve viewership of old videos because it would only be odds and ends that are more timely to the present day but lack the specifics of the past.
ooooooh i love that idea
Wtf is canning air? Id love a simon video about weird forensic techniques. The morgue also sounds like a good idea, though since a lot of these cas crims are about old/settled cases im not sure how many there would need to be
Ooh, those sound really interesting!
@@chrstfer2452 IIRC, they used canning air in the Caysey (?) Anthony trial.
@@koivunen2489 oh is it to use smells as evidence? Jebus
Nearly 2 hours of Cas Crim to help me through work on Monday? Yes please!. This story was fascinating, I love hearing stories that might be not as well known. Listening to these when not knowing a thing about them gets my inner detective thinking and I get so much more into it. Thanks Simon, Emma, Chris, and the rest of the basement crew for all your fantastic work!
I kept it till today, so that I could listen at work on Tuesday! Best thing to listen to while working!
Long time subscriber - from Dunedin. Live in London.
This, the Aramoana shootings and the Sophie Elliot case are big crime events from Otago. Was interested to hear how this script went! Great work Emma.
You did well with the place name pronunciations too Simon. Taranaki
Ooh Sophie Elliot would be a case i would love to see. Angela Blackmore too. They only just caught the people this yr for her murder.
He called it 'Dun din'!
@@GardinerAlan in Simons defence it was only once and sounded more like a script error than a Simon one.
@@JessicaClark-lq4gw Yeah maybe
Fellow Dunedinite here 👋 Sophie Elliot was tragic. I remember that psycho that killed her, he was such an arrogant asshole & just made himself look like an even bigger fuckwit when in court. Sophie's mum I would often see around town & sadly she died not too long ago.
I was absolutely glued to this from beginning to end. Excellent writing, Emma! The story kept me on the edge of my seat as I hadn't heard of this case before today. Whenever I am aware that Casual Criminalist posts a new video I instantly press play no matter what As I am such a fan of the team of writers , editors and of course , Mr Simon Whistler, as it's always a pleasure. Thank you for another fantastic video !
Martin van Beyen has an excellent long podcast about this. He was at all of the trials and includes the interviews with the judges afterwards. He has no doubts that David killed them all. It’s a very compelling report.
I believe Simon could indeed talk to Peacocks.
Wonder what they talked about? 😅
@@rachelbarrie5359 his children, house renovation, living in the woods and the quality of berries and grain in Czechia.
Simon could talk a statue back to life 😅
@@rachelbarrie5359 Maybe they had a lively debate about the death penalty?
Peacock: 't is better to have ten guilty go free than one innocent locked up
Simon: put him in the chair!!
Easy to talk to Peacocks, it's when they start talking back that I'd get worried 😂
I lived in Dunedin for many years, and i remember one time i was trying on a vintage knitted jersey and the shop owner described it as "very David Bain"..... Needless to say i did not buy it and also wtf type of sales strategy is that
Fantastically well researched Emma, and good editing Chris.
Love how Simon is so easily swayed by the presentation of the evidence; he'd be a nightmare on a jury 🤣🤣
I reckon that David did it, but the police were completely out of their depth and made mistakes.
If you want a chance at an acquittal or at least a mistrial, then you need Simon on your jury. He takes beyond reasonable doubt to the extreme. Of course, he also loves seeing criminals ounished with the chair, so if you did it, better hope the police screwed up something.
Great script, interesting situation. I still feel like it was most likely him, given all the details we were given about him. How controlling he was over siblings and the family, his strained relationship with his father (who apparently chose to spare him but also frame him before killing himself?) and his faked fits and even faking being unconscious when first picked up. And going out of your way to be noticed to try to give yourself an alibi, like happening to make the lady's dog bark for the first time in months and it just so happens to be the day everyone gets murdered. Oh, and the fact that he was the one that called the family meeting that made sure they would all be present. And how he knew more than he should have, and changed his story, what he told his aunt when he was staying with them...The guy is either guilty or went out of his way to look as guilty as possible.
Granted, the whole family was doomed from the beginning. It seems like everyone in the family had their own problems that fed into each other and made a house so toxic it had to be burned to the ground. Burning it for real probably wasn't the best idea, at least that early. But I'm not sure what evidence they could have found to prove David's innocence, given that they were "the worst kind of hoarders". And also that he totally did it. Allegedly.
He's lucky he was charismatic enough to convince a rugby player he was innocent, and that the police were as incompetent as police generally seem to be. But hey, it's not like we know any other murderers that happen to be charismatic or anything.
Yeah, and not to mention, he also had like semi confessions to his aunt and girlfriend. He knew information that wasn’t in the newspapers about where the bodies were. I know he changed his story in later said he must’ve seen them. but why would he ask why his brother had to struggle?
Also the fact that they’re mad that the police let the family burn down the house. Which fair they should have stopped them but they are not the ones who choose to burn down the house. I don’t know about you, but if there was anything that could help figure out what happened to my family I would not burn down the location.
As a kiwi, I have been waiting for this episode forever!!
Saaaame!!
Me 3
Fruit can't use a phone silly guy
@@MrAwesomeone this fruit can ayooo 🌈✨
As a kiwi, I have also been waiting.
Thanks for taking up my suggestion. Nice to see a NZ case on Casual Criminalist
I'm like 60% sure it's David Bain that did it, unfortunately that 40% is a rather significant chunk of doubt & definitely means I'm not "sure beyond a reasonable doubt". So if I was on the jury I would have to acquit David even though I'm 60% sure he did it. It really annoys me that the police f**ked up so majorly with allowing the house to be burnt & destroying evidence, as well as not even running some of the tests they DEFINITELY should have.
Yes. I also have the feeling that a killer was let go because of police incompetence. But of course we can never know. Which is why we do have to err on the side of caution and let him go.
Thank you so so much for covering this case, I was so hoping it would be picked up! The case is still a point of argument at dinner parties. Many thanks and appreciation from down here in Aotearoa.
lol I’m genuinely not trying to be condescending but the idea of discussing and debating a mass murder at a dinner party is just a hella funny image to me 😂
My first thought when reading the title was "oh no, Batman finally broke his most sacred rule" but then I realized I'm an idiot and that's the wrong Bane/Bain
Edit: and there's a Robin in the story LMAO
I read this while Simon was first talking about Robin which made this extra amusing
Aaah fellow nerd, although my brain went immediately to darth bane. And then when i read it correctly i heard dallas from payday 2 yelling BAAAAAAIN 😂
David Bain should still be in prison in my opinion. The forensics, his changing statements, lies and confessions crush any doubt I had of his guilt.
Also the fact that he had defensive wounds and the fact that the way the gun was found shows that it was definitely placed there next to Robin. And the computer note sealed it for me. As if Robin, after murdering his family, would wait to start up his slow computer and write a note instead of on a piece of paper, especially for a son that hated him.
1:35 - Chapter 1 - The bain family
22:40 - Chapter 2 - The murders
37:05 - Chapter 3 - The murder trial of david bain
1:02:50 - Chapter 4 - The rugby player & the court of appeals
1:12:50 - Chapter 5 - The 2nd murder trial of david bain
1:29:25 - Chapter 6 - Aftermath
1:39:00 - Dismembered appendices
So awesome to see coverage and perspective on such a divisive and contentious case in my little old country of New Zealand! You did great on the the Māori language pronunciations too 👍🏼
I was thinking the same, would be good to see Simon cover the Sounds Murders
I agree the prosecution is relying heavily on circumstantial evidence. So I think the question to ask yourself is when does enough circumstantial evidence pile up that you feel comfortable saying guilty?
The majority of cases are based on circumstantial evidence though. Unless there's direct evidence .( i.e a witness that happened to see the murder or some type video footage.) Any evidence found including forensics is circumstantial.
@Rayahx3. Yeah forensics only prove the person was there. Doesn't prove when they wore there.
While that is a fair question, they definitely had way more than enough circumstantial evidence in this case. Also, they could have easily found some real evidence if the police just did a little bit of work.
@@Fitz1993or just, like, not actively burn all the physical evidence they already had.
How much contortion do we need to do for the circumstantial evidence to not line up?
Emma did a fantastic job with this script, i must say. I saw a different true crime channel's coverage of this story a little while ago and it couldn't hold a candle to this. It took me about 20-30 minutes of this ep to realize it was even the same case because of all the great in-depth background Emma gave on the family where the other channel gave zero and only told one version of the case (i.e. the David's guilty and framed his dad version) only giving half the facts. Well done Emma!
I can’t believe how rapidly Simon turned around on this one. I believe this guy is absolutely guilty, can’t believe how quickly Simon forgot about so much damning evidence from earlier in the episode.
I don't feel he did a full shift, just leaning from one towards the other. Personally, I'm not fully convinced he's innocent but, more importantly, his guilt hasn't been proven beyond a reasonable doubt either. I think Simon is looking at it the same way. One thing's for sure: the loss of evidence (allowing the house burned down and such) leaves so many unanswered questions. I found it baffling already the cops just decided to hang out the laundry on a crime scene.
Eh police got sloppy and there was plenty of reasonable doubt.
Lots of evidence, but if it was so clear, they have even less excuses for botching it
Simon doesn't think he's innocent, he thinks there's a reasonable doubt. And there kind of is... BUT not to me, I'd vote guilty for sure.
I put it down to his lame glasses.
Obviously not really.
But darken those rims.
He's not infallible. But who is? No judging...
Simon i watch all your channels but this is the one i look forward to each week.
This case is "Yes, David did it, but due to shoddy police work and debatable decisions by the judge, he should have been acquitted." So right outcome for justice, but technically the wrong outcome for due process.
yea like, everyone can know you did something, but if theres no real evidence the court can't just throw you in jail
I would put it the opposite way. Due process is why he went free, but it's not justice. Justice failed by not respecting due process, leading to reversal of the conviction.
@@thefisherking78 Yeah. I worded it in a clunky way. I think some justice was served by him going to prison for 13 years.
@@llcoolray3000 all good, clearly we agree on the substance of things 😜
It’s pretty well accepted that David did it and his release was pretty controversial. I was someone sympathetic as a kid watching his retrial unfold years later not really understanding the specifics of the case. As an adult it’s seemingly cut and dry what happened. There’s only so many circumstances you can explain away. Also a life sentence here is like 25 years it’s notoriously lax.
What if they both did it?
(I apologize if this idea has already been proposed.)
Hear me out:
-Robin is a creep and abuses his daughter.
-David is raised by an obsessive mother and a creep father, becoming rather creepy himself.
-Robin hates his life and decides to off his family.
-Daughter threatens to tell everyone about the abuse. This forces Robin's hand, and in a rush, he decides to get up in the morning and off everyone while they sleep.
-That morning, Robin finds David up early and heading out the door.
-It's then Robin decides to frame David. (Or maybe that was just the rushed plan all along.)
-David comes home and goes about cleaning himself up in the dark.
- David eventually realizes what happened and goes looking for everyone.
-David finds Robin waiting.
-An altercation ensues that results in Robin's death.
-David whips up the "blackouts" so Robin's murder gets ruled a self deletion.
There are probably holes in this idea, but it's still an interesting hypothesis to entertain.
Also, I request a "gahd dayumn," counter.
Have a great day yall!
Alternately: Robin kills Margaret over their marital issues, then himself out of guilt. David comes home, realizes his parents are dead, and kills his siblings so they don't have to face that, then writes the note to make it look like Robin killed all of them.
There are plenty of possibilities and combinations of how it could have happened. I think this is a case where there was too much evidence that wasn't properly handled so we'll never know the truth.
The fact that he even got acquitted fucking bothers me.
David Bain absolutely fucking did it. The police got sloppy because they thought they had locked it down.
100%
Because they proved it was possible that the dad did it. It's designed so that guild people go to jail. Possible innocent people go free. I'm on the fence between Robin and David. It was one of the 2. Given where the gun was located. Plus the reports from friends and family (no fact. Just a rumor) Robin was banging his daughter and she was going to tell. So hard to say 100% what one did it.
I mean, good chance he did it. Shame they railroaded him if they didn't need to. Withholding evidence, allowing more evidence to be destroyed, etc.. 💩 job by the cops.
@@mvb88 I mean, #1 the rifle was *placed upright* on the ground next to Robin. Rifles do not naturally fall onto the ground upright, even if you drop it a few inches off the ground while it’s already upright. And a dead man with a bullet in his head isn’t going to gently place the rifle down. Even if the shot didn’t immediately kill Robin, when you sustain a mortal injury, your muscles tense up and them immediately loosen, resulting in the gun either being dropped if it’s heavy, or stuck in the hand if it’s light. This fact alone told me the gun was either tampered with after Robin shot himself, or someone else shot him. And seeing as David never mentions fooling around with the gun after coming home, I’d say that’s pretty damning on David’s part. Also, #2, there’s the fact that Robin and David did not get along. Davis hated his father, and wanted him gone long before this. If Robin were to spare any of his children from his murder suicide, David would probably be his last choice. The wording used in his supposed suicide note is extremely odd, and feels more like a narcissistic attempt to show how special David is compared to the rest of his family. “You are the only one who deserves to live.” Bullshit. #3, His father’s character may be disputed due to claims from one of his kids (and I don’t want to call the girl a liar because you never know, I’ll just mention there’s room for doubt. It could be completely true or false), but no one ever claimed he was violent with his family (I would classify SA as violence, but I’m specifically talking about physical abuse and threatening to kill). But David was. David had multiple reports of being extremely controlling, creepy, and downright scary. A friend of his even claimed (although I don’t believe there was ever concrete proof) that he planned the SA of a little girl. This claim, however, is supported by the numerous other claims from girls that he was creepy and unsettling. A person who plans out a SA is 100% capable of violence, that is, if this claim is true. There is obviously no definitive way to prove the guilt of either, and in the end, we will probably never know. However, I would say the the evidence really leans towards David being the killer, not a 50/50 chance of it being either. This whole thing is really a matter of shoddy police work and crappy preservation skills imo, whether David is guilty or Innocent.
@justalittleturtle5600 it's why I'm on the fence. There is evidence saying David did it. There is also evidence that says Robin did it. People who say Robin couldn't have done it because it's a rifle. It was proven that his arms are long enough. It would of been hard for him to do it but possible. Only thing that would answer the question is the angle of the bullet entering his head. If it goes in on a 90 degree angle. David did it. If it goes in on a angle going from bottom to top. He committed suicide. Given he'd move his head to get a bit more reach from his arm to get the trigger. If you think about that point. It would answer it. It shifts his shoulders over by a inch or 2. For me anyway. That alters the angel of his head next to the gun. So the bullet wouldn't enter at a 90 degree angle. But then David could of shot Robin in the head on the same angel. Only person who knows the truth is David. Either he's told the truth and he's innocent or he's lied to get out of jail and keep the money and property
I really appreciate your videos and empathy you bring to them 🤗
Suggestion: Richard Chase, the Vampire of Sacramento.
Love this channel. Even the 3 hour videos that take me over a week to get through.
yesss agree, would love Simon’s reaction to that one
So happy to see a long casual criminalist today!! Simon makes the chores go faster ❤but CC is my favorite channel from Fact Boi!!
I believe David did commit the murders. There is some forensic evidence that does point towards him, and all the evidence that could suggest it was actually Robin is very much up for interpretation at best. Then there's the stuff like the fake fits David had (which immediately stopped when that one dude told him to stop), as well as the fake unconsciousness.
His claims of black-outs and then suddenly later remembering how he did actually wander around the house and see his dead siblings after his story was found to be inconsistent is highly suspicious as well.
But probably the biggest red flag for me is the statement from the woman who woke up from David doing his paper route and waking her up. She had asked him not to alarm her dog, and he gracefully conformed to her wish. Then exactly that morning, he goes on his paper route and conveniently 'forgets' about this and wakes her up. Absolutely reeks of establishing an alibi. Except it's been confirmed he went on his route earlier than usual.
However. The way the case was handled by police, railroading David, withholding potential evidence that could suggest a different version of events, and subsequently letting the house get burned down, the gathered evidence to be destroyed, and making stuff up in court (i.e. the glasses lense in the photo). Plus the actual evidence itself also being up for interpretation ...
I do think David should have been acquitted in the first place. Guilt beyond reasonable doubt and all that. I firmly believe in the idea of rather having 10 guilty people go free than having 1 innocent person wrongfully convicted. And nothing about this case screamed 100% certainty to me.
One thing not mentioned: how did Robin shoot himself with the rifle? Given the length of the rifle, and the additional length of the suppressor, it would have been very awkward to hold it to his head and even pull the trigger. I doubt his arms were be long enough, so did he use his toe to activate the trigger?
Don’t know the time stamp but there was a visualization they put up on screen for what was used in the court room to show an example.
Was proven his arm was just long enough to push the trigger. That's why David was released. It was proven that it was possible someone else did it.
@@mvb88did they check for gunshot residue on Robins hand?
@@Spicypoptart1 they didn't iirc, they only checked David's.
@@Spicypoptart1 no they didn't. See how David got off in the retrial. So much evidence that should of been taken. Wasn't taken. So cops couldn't prove Robin didn't do it. So it put in in that Robin could just reach the trigger. Would of been very hard to reach but posable.
David had the most motive. Many things were not allowed into either of his trials....one was that he was obsessed with Arawa and used to steal underwear from her drawers and hide them in his. Arawa was aware of this. She was scared of David and how possessive he was with her. She was not allowed to go anywhere unless he drove her and he drove her everywhere. She wasn't allowed to visit friends after school so the friends used to visit her at home - two sisters were her close friends. That was until the sisters mother met David for the first time and she got such a bad feeling she would not allow her daughters to visit Arawa's home anymore, but she was welcome to visit their house and stay over any time. So Arawa planned to do so but he objected in front of the friends mother and refused, so the mother stepped in and told David in no uncertain terms that Arawa would be coming to stay at their house overnight. David grudgingly gave in and he drove Arawa to the friends home telling her he'd be there to pick her up in the morning. He arrived before 6am before the family was even up. He had to wait in the car while Arawa had breakfast with the family. David was seething. That last weekend, Arawa had been with her friend to look at flats to rent and David was aware of this. He was about to lose control over his obsession (Arawa). She was leaving home because she was scared of David and because she wanted to escape the general chaos of her home and the dysfunction and toxic atmosphere. David was not going to allow her to leave. Later when his Aunt was planning the funerals David tried to take over and decide what every dead victim was going to wear and what music would be choses for them. He wanted Arawa to wear a push up bra.......and her music was to be Queen's "Who wants to live forever". The Aunt told him all of this was inappropriate and David stomped out in anger. Thank God he was arrested before the funeral because it would have been a circus and all about David.
Also by this time David was on the outs with his mother and he came to find there would be no room for him in the new house. Younger brother Stephen was the new favorite and Mummy was building a special rom for her and Stephen....it was very incestuous sounding, and David would have to sleep elsewhere or in the caravan.........also David had fantasies about raping women joggers, saying how he could use his paper route as an alibi.....he told friends of this fantasy, but it was not allowed to be related in court. They miss half the information.....
You are really on top of these CC's, Simon. Ty!
This is just what I needed this afternoon. Thank you Fact Boy!
I used to flat with a guy whose Father as a high ranking cop in NZ, he was in charge of re-investigating cold cases when new technology became available.
He would pop round for a beer every now and then, I asked him about this case and he told me the police who did the crime scene initial investigation had cut a couple of corners that left some evidence inadmissible. One of those pieces of evidence was a journal of David’s that outlined his plan to rape a female jogger he used to see on his paper rounds and his strategy to avoid prosecution - it read exactly as the one he used when asked about the murder of his family.
Hi from New Zealand!!! I've been a regular watcher of ur various channels for like 5 years now and here we are again. Though I'm not sure being on this chanel is something to be proud of 😅
Hi! I’m from the home town of where this took place and you explained the detail of this so well. I’m a long time listener and so stoked to see you cover this case!!
I would like to highlight something:
Robin had a routine where he prayed....
How many pray with their eyes closed?
Getting close, without being noticed, in that situation doesn't seem difficult.
Growing up in NZ this was really good to get the recap of all the events. I hadn't heard about the mother being 'away with the fairies'. The impressions I remember of the case were the coverage including David's awful sweaters, after his not-guilty second trial people threatening petitions for him to get back his paper route, and to join Dancing with the Stars!
Maybe I missed something but why would Robin wipe down the gun? Especially if he's a) about to kill himself and b) wrote his son an absolution letter? And if it didn't even have Robin's fingerprints on it, who wiped it after he offed himself? Please explain what I'm missing.
In 1994 it took longer than 2 minutes to boot up (start up) a computer it took several minutes between turning it on and being able to run programs. It also took quite a while to open programs. So it had to be after David returned to the house that the message was typed. So if David did not type it someone was alive when he returned.
which makes me think that maybe robin killed his family… probably intended to kill david too… but david, after discovering his dead family, got the better of his father… that would also explain if robin changed clothes… because he thought he would be the sole surviver… but still the message itself doesn’t make much sense… but robin might have had a weird story lined up to “explain” it… which david didn’t
Thanks to Emma for the thorough script and equally thorough research on this case. I had heard of this case before, but this is the first coverage I've found with this level of detail. I also grew up on a farm, and when I was in high school my dad was a partner in a meat shop where I worked my last couple of summers before graduating. I'm now older than either of my parents were when I finished high school, and this realization terrifies me. 🤣
Thanks For this Simón and emma! Love learning more with this channel. Please cover the FTX Scam
I remember studying a media class in university. In one of our courses, we went to Australia and New Zealand to study a bit about their media but to mostly see the effects of American media on other, English speaking cultures. We were told to read about crime that had been reported. I came across a book about the Parker-Hulme Murder in Christchurch. I remember, although being a (true) crime buff, that the case bugged me and weirded me out. I'd love to see an episode here about that!
Jury members hugging David and attending a party in his honor is a red flag. I'm surprised that the prosecution didn't retry the case based on possible jury misconduct. In regards to the case, David's guilt / innocence, would've only determined whether or not he would be compensated. If he was found guilty (for a second time), wouldn't he get time served? He had already served the minimum by the start of second trial.
THIS! How is this ok? Shouldn't jurors be impartial? When they show such favoritism it should be another retrial. And it was not only one juror, it was at least a couple.
@@ildisiri YES I have always believed that David did it, seeing the jury members hugging David after the trial and attending his party left a sour taste in my mouth
@@abbyburtenshaw8200 I am not sure what this case was about, but if it was for the young man that probably killed his entire family but was exonerated then I am rly glad to see that other people think the same!
Ive slowly but surely become addicted to listening at work on yt 😅.. good stuff keep it up you guys help get me through the work night 🙏🏼❤
Why would Robin confess on the computer and tell David that he deserved to live, and then wash clothes and attempt to clean the crime scene to obfuscate his own guilt, all the while making David look suspicious? There’s no reason for that.
Coincidentally I watched the lipstick killer episode right before this one and it just makes you frustrated seeing a man who was most definitely possibly innocent go to prison for life and then seeing David Bain totally guilty (allegedly in my opinion) go free
I have been waiting so long for you guys to cover this! I am stoked!
Kia ora from Wellington, New Zeland! So glad you're covering this. This case was a big deal here. Despite the final outcome, there are still people on both sides of the fence of who dunnit. Quite impressed with your pronouciation too Simon 😂.
As a New Zealander I'm course interested in this case, but could never be bothered reading any of the books on the subject. Thanks for providing an in depth alternative!! :D
The complete lack of any actual clinical psychology in this case is staggering.
Dismissing the sisters claim her rather regularly raped her, with multiple separate corroborations, as "attention seeking" just because she had blurted out a confession as a young girl to a authority figure; shows how incompetent the prosecution was.
I legit gasped out loud when the PE teacher said he had not believed her because he didn't see any visible scars. And then I absolutely couldn't believe that THAT was used as evidence that she was making stuff up.
Also, they basically just put Robin aside as a possible suspect in the incest and murder case because he was a frail older man, and good in his community??? The kid who managed to fight off the attacker, after being shot in the hand, and had his head grazes, was 14!!!!! That's like a kid!!! And apparently he was able to struggle for a good bit?
Oh god. There's nothing like the justice process that can remind me that the stigma around abnormal behaviors, mental health conditions, and its role in criminal events is like 50 years behind everything else.
I don't understand where the rest of the family was on all this. The aunt and uncle take David in after this happens but they had to know that the situation at that house was a hot mess. No one called social services when Margaret started saying all of her children were possessed by the devil. I mean talk about an alarm bell for mental illness and family annihilation. So many missed warnings in this entire case.
Ha, I knew we were the same age from previous videos but not how close (my bday is on the 1st xD). Great video as always, what a mystery! No wonder it's divisive even to this day!
While we're on the topic of controversial New Zealand murder cases, you should do the disappearance of Ben Smart and Olivia Hope. Another case that may or may not be a wrongful conviction, and it ended in a murder conviction without their bodies ever being found.
Watson did it. Otherwise he'd be out by now.
@@Poppa_Capinyoaz I don't think he did it. Never got parole cos he'd have to admit it which he didn't.
I love these long form episodes, belting to listen to whilst working.
Good iob fact boi!
"Why are you wearing so many clothes?" 'cause it's winter in Otago. Pre dawn in June? Definitely under 10°C, possibly quite close to freezing :)
Also just New Zealand in general, especially back then. We'd rather put on three pairs of trousers than turn on the bloody heater...
That question gave me sunny Dunedin PTSD
I can't believe I've been watching Simon for over a decade this is the strangest one-sided friendship I have ever had because Simon and I, on the same page.
Me when they are a nice newlywed Kiwi couple: aw, they seem lovely.
Me when we find out they stopped bathing their kids, got deeper into Christianity, and got deeper into the indigenous religion and started imitating the social structures: oh shit.
BTW: When I lived in China, I met some Zimbabweans who had spent several years in Papua New Guinea. It is *stunningly* beautiful and has some of the best scuba sites in the world.
Great NZ Pronunciation! I live twenty minutes from where this all went down, in a town called Aramoana. Might see that place on a future casual criminalist too!
Simon talking about his vivid ass dream in this video made me laugh, because I had a vivid dream last night (I know Simon probably filmed this in January) where I was renting a room from Simon (which Simon renting rooms to people in his house would likely be a nightmare for Simon) or Simon was my landlord for some reason, and he'd just keep plugging his sponsors whenever we'd talk like our general convos also required the occasional ad break. We're talking about the rental terms and halfway in there is a break to talk about Vessi for example. I woke up laughing when I realised how random the dream was. Also just putting out there the head canon version of real life Simon and his Wife were lovely people to know and I love that is even the impression my subconscious mind thinks of Simon from the impression we get of him from his videos
Thrilled to catch the Matt Orchard quote, his channel is brilliant and I reckon CasCrim fans will enjoy it. Equally thrilled at the prospect of Emma cultivating some rugby beef. Thank you Emma for these dual gifts.
I don’t remember all the details of when this happened but when talking about this it’s always been a debate between David and the father being responsible, never mentioning the bat shit crazy mother. Am a New Zealander and this still comes up on occasion.
I know all the evidence between David and Robin but just like you. I didn't know the mum was a bitch. That would kinda prove Robin did it. Having a wife like that. Then off the kids because they knew who did it and didn't want them to live with that. David wouldn't of known. But in saying that. Having a mum like that. Maybe David snapped.
Imo they over corrected and David is guilty. It will never make sense that the father decides to commit family annihilation but leaves alive David, the kid who gave was the most like his mother and gave him the most grief.
3:43 I remember being maybe 10, having a spirited, friendly debate with my dad. Mom got very upset and told him that she had always been so nervous at his “fights” with his siblings (who lived far enough away that this had never been worth addressing, I assume). That he was starting this with me was… and cue 2 neurodivergents who are very confused. Dad said that he was not angry with me, and was indeed extremely proud whenever I gave aa strong counter to his point. I have actually had very few fights with him in my entire life in part because I have always known that he can accept a conclusion different than his if I have reasoning behind it.
Doesn’t mean that he never tells his little sister (they had horrible parents and has reversed our names since I was a newborn and she was 25 because apparently “younger girl I take care of” fit both of us so well) or me we should do x and does shocked Pikachu face when we go “the brain you encouraged me to use says y better fits my situation” but still.
Mom did eventually see that both of us (and Auntie when she became a regular character) were relaxed and enjoying our debates. Always left us too it, though. She was more of a “be diplomatic and avoid controversy to keep the peace” type as her entire family tended to model (it wasn’t a trauma response)
God I'm so jealous. My dad and I are both neurodivergent too but when I try to disagree with/debate him he just gets defensive and pissy lol
If you want to read the full script for this episode, you can!
It's on a page that begins with Pat, and ends with Eon. Unfortunately, YT deletes all the comments where I mention it, or leave a link 🙄
Awesome script as always Emma. I watch a telamovie thing on UA-cam but you always wonder how much of those facts are true.
I know how much research you put into writing the scripts so I don't even have to think about what's true and what's not
@@juliamcwilliam Thank you! And yes, it frustrates me to no end when people add their own spin to the case. I recently wrote a script where the most popular true crime book on the case is at least 25% fictional since the author just added his own version of events
emma herself :O
Took awhile to watch this episode. Thank you for the long script. My favs are the episodes I doze off too... Can doze off too. Then I have to rewatch, with my morning coffee.
As a New Zealander, congratulations on your pronunciation of Taranaki, and yes, this is probably the best known family murder in our country
Simon please! You must share unto us the wisdom of the peacocks!
Fun fact: Murdering someone while sleepwalking is rare but possible. In the event that it happens the defense is declared not guilty because of temporary insanity.
When I started watching, the likes were at 542, now they're at 1.1k in 2 hours. Great script as always, and surprisingly few tangents by Simon this round.
I mean, no matter what you think we can all agree cops did a terrible job. Why didn't they test Rileys hand for gun powder? If neither of them had residue, there's only one that could've washed his hands 😅
Simon i love your work,
I live in new zealand and remember the case well your brilliant script writer did a amazing job on this more information than id seen before.
There a couple of other unsolved murders here. Ie the Crewe murders in the early 70s
Live in New Zealand, this was big in its time. Son is now out and married, living quiet life. Well done Simon on the NZ punctuation ❤
He even managed to say Taieri like a north islander
Pretty bad pronunciation right through... But at least Simon tried to sound like a North Islander....
Scary! Great job, Emma🥀🌻
One day I’d like to see a timer on screen that pauses every time Simon goes off on a Segway, so we can tell how long the script actually is.
One of his other channels does have a tangent timer, lol.
@@karenshadle365 yes Brain Blaze
They should definitely make him do all his tangents on a Segway.
@Madmij
I know what you mean , but autocorrect has tripped you up. You actually mean" segue." Autocorrect must have changed it to Segway,LOL. It tried to change my reply too! Segway is that machine you stand on and it helps you move electronically.
Segue is when a person takes the conversation off into a different direction.,which we all know and love Simon for doing.
I believe you know this, you're just a victim of autocorrect. Haha
As a Kiwi i want to Thank you for covering this Simon. This was MASSIVE when I was at school. Good try with the NZ place names. The butchering you did of them, however, deserves their own Casual Criminalist episode, and Emma, as for the Rugby, Go to hell. ❤
I’d love Simon to cover the “Teacher’s Pet” case from Australia. I know the podcast of that name did the most in depth version of it I’ve seen but I’d love Simons take on it :)
I haven’t seen it so I’d love it too! ❤😂
As a new Zealander I grew up hearing about this case. Keen to hear Simon's opinion!
From NZ definitely was a head scratcher at the time ,should the Aromoana incident sometime
Simon you should really do a video on Brenda Ann, the 1979 Cleveland Grover School shooter immortalised by Boomtown Rats ‘I don’t like Mondays’ after hear quote on why she killed her principal and fellow students with a 22LR
Simon, I need to know, what wisdom do the peacocks hold?!
I’ll watch whatever you read but I love it when I haven’t heard of the case!
Computer timing.....
The computer's clock was not referenced by the computer expert. He referenced a process in the operating system that shows the precise hours, minutes, and seconds, since the process started when the computer was booted up. It is this time that was subtracted from the men's wristwatches to estimate the time the computer was powered on. It's their watches that introduced the uncertainty, not the computer itself.