15 Aug 2010 12:21p.m.

Ben wrote:

You knw there is a bit of a cloud over Michael Laws now. People in glass houses should not throw stones and after that debate, which we heard on the radio, Micael telling Joe he was a liar, somehow is not now so trustworthy. Michael said he makes mistakes and htat is where the buck stops. Yes Michael, we know now.

06 Aug 2010 11:19p.m.

bobberesford.com wrote:

This bit on Campbell live was well edited, but the debate itself was often a waste. Michael Laws was right out of his depth here and didn't know enough about the case . Joe karam did, of course, and he (and the police) has monopolised this case for years, Karam largely conducting trial by media. Laws ruined it by interrupting, and Brent Impey should have kept tighter rein. Karam was very selective in the way he presented, and got away with it, because most people, including Laws, really know little about it. But, as tax payers, it's cost them a fortune. And thanks to our terrible adversarial system, the truth is suppressed and the accused can be silent in court while the legal bills - inevitably - climb. Eg when the case first ran, both sides knew that Laniet had been finished off with a sheet or pillow over her head....due to fabric on the shell. But sheet never found. A case run Inquisitorially , would have handled that. But as an adversarial case, that evidence was thrown out - therefore suppressed. An Inquisition could have graded evidence, including stuff deemed inadmissable, via objection. I was inside this case for about 10 years, often visiting David in prison. It's a complex case, with evidence pointing both ways. Needs really close inspection of the forensics, but Karam has sealed those off - from the Defence angle . And it closes from the cops/Gov/prosecution side. In 1999 i sent a 50 page write up on it into Clarke and Gov General. In 2000 a chance for a negotiated settlement was offered - via 4 proveable case points - which the Defence didn't recognise/handle properly and completely blew. The position of Robin suiciding with ( left ) foot on chair was my suggestion. Very simple. The blood spatter patterns are very explaneable, and the 2-3 slight smears. It's an accurate contact/close contact wound. Gun behind curtain is also very possible - cartridge in alcove suggests it. Winchesters eject back and to the right. The B.Bruce Doco was pathetic.

06 Aug 2010 09:17p.m.

Lightseed wrote:

it's sad to see tv3 has begun editing the comments again to show their fanboy position of a murderer.