Trial bill for taxpayers may top $4m

BY MARTIN VAN BEYNEN

New Zealand's most sensational trial may have cost taxpayers more than $4 million.

A jury yesterday found David Bain not guilty of murdering his family in Dunedin 15 years ago.

The seven women and five men returned to the High Court in Christchurch about 5pm and delivered a not-guilty verdict on all five murder charges.

The verdicts showed the jury thought the system had got it wrong.

Costs have yet to be finalised, but sources have told The Press a "back of the envelope" total was $4 million to $5m. That does not include the salaries of police, judicial, ministry and court staff who have expended a huge amount of time on the case.

Police are believed to have spent about $500,000 on expenses for the retrial, and legal services provided to the Crown are expected to cost about $750,000 for the retrial and preliminary hearings over two years.

The Legal Services Agency disclosed yesterday that Bain had received $2,056,495 in legal aid to date for his retrial, although many invoices had still to come in.

Bain received $706,127 legal aid for his 1995 trial, his original Court of Appeal hearing and the original appeal to the Privy Council.

Bain supporter Joe Karam has been working 70 to 80-hour weeks since the Privy Council decision in 2007, having hardly a day off, he told The Press yesterday.

He was paid at the legal executive rate of $75 an hour and has been paid for three hours each day of the trial.

Private donations had helped, but had not been more than the campaign had cost him personally, he said.

Bain, 37, who had been charged with shooting his parents, Robin, 58, and Margaret, 50, and his three siblings, Arawa, 19, Laniet, 18, and Stephen, 14, on June 20, 1994, in Dunedin, heard the verdicts from the dock after a 13-week retrial.

His convictions for the murders after a four-week trial in Dunedin in 1995 were overturned by the Privy Council in May 2007, and a new trial was ordered.

He was about 13 years into a 16-year non-parole sentence when the convictions were quashed. He has been on bail since May 2007 after being in custody since June 24, 1994.

The trial has captured the public imagination like no other trial in New Zealand's history.

Television coverage of the verdicts matched the media frenzy attracted by US President Bill Clinton's visit in 1999. About 50 media personnel covered the verdicts at the High Court.

The trial has presented a classic whodunit.

To find Bain not guilty, the jurors must have believed the Crown had not proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. Justice Panckhurst had told them a logical and honest uncertainty was enough to establish a reasonable doubt.

The defence case was that Bain was a nice guy who had no motive to shoot his family, while Robin the culprit, it said was depressed and facing incest allegations from Laniet.

It pointed to blood on Robin's hands and a bloodied sock print in the hallway of the Bain house as forensic links connecting Robin to the killings. It was scathing about the quality of the 1994 police investigation.

The Crown argued Robin was clearly not the murderer because no-one bent on killing his family and committing suicide would wear gloves during the crimes and change into other clothes before shooting himself.

It pointed to David Bain waiting 20 minutes before calling the police after finding the bodies, and injuries on his body that he could not explain.

It said an abundance of forensic evidence linked him to the murders.

Christchurch QC Nigel Hampton said Bain could apply for compensation. However, his chances of success would be limited because Bain would be required to prove his innocence, which was much harder than proving reasonable doubt to a jury.

Michael Reed, QC, said after the verdict: "Thank God it's all over. David is totally and utterly overcome. Freedom to him is not there yet. It hasn't dawned on him. He deserves every bit of it.

"This has been a ridiculously expensive trial. It should never have been brought. Millions have been spent millions of legal aid and it's quite a tragedy really.

"Thank God the right answer had come out. David is looking forward to the future."

Detective Superintendent Malcolm Burgess said the police accepted the verdict and would spend the night "reflecting".

"We are disappointed with the outcome but accept the jury's decision," he said.

"The investigation in 1994 was thorough and impartial. The material presented as evidence over the past few months is essentially the same material presented in the first trial. For police, this ends the matter."

- © Fairfax NZ News