Should Bain be retried?

Two key issues loom for David Bain. Will the Crown seek a new trial, and if so will he get bail before it? What are the pros and cons of a new trial? We discussed this briefly on Agenda. Chris Baldock (Sunday News Editor) thought they should not, and Lisa Owen made the point that it would be very hard to get a jury who have not formed some conclusions based on media reporting of the case (unless you found 12 hermits). I lean a bit more towards a new trial, on the grounds that if they do not retry him, then the Crown is morally bound to pay millions of compensation to Bain, and that should only happen if he has been actually acquitted.

Anyway here are some pros and cons of a new trial:

Pros

* If acquitted in a new trial, Bain clears his name
* If found guilty in a new trial, gives finality to the issue
* Compensation should not be paid unless he is acquitted
* Unfair to Robin Bain to leave the killer allegation upon him untested
* If convicted, ensures Bain serves full sentence
* If convicted again, Bain less able to profit from his crime through books etc.

Cons

* Difficult to find a neutral jury
* Expert testimony less reliable 13 years on
* Bain has already served over 75% of his non parole period
* Bain is not a danger to the community – even if he did do it
* Prosecution will look vindictive

Any others?

Incidentally one of the original Jurors has come out saying that they placed little reliance on the stuff dealt with by the Privy Council and what they found compellling was the fight with the other son, as they could not believe an old man like Robin Bain could have endured such a furious fight and also be unscathed from it.