Who’s defaming who?

9289831

Joe Karam: I was attacked

David Bain supporter Joe Karam experienced “the worst four years of his life” as his reputation was “laid siege to” by the authors of the Justice For Robin Bain website, Karam’s lawyer says.

Karam is suing Kent Parker and Vic Purkiss in the High Court in Auckland for their branding of him as “a liar, fraudster, crook and scoundrel” in the wake of Bain’s retrial for the 1994 murder of his family.

Bain, supported by Karam, was found not guilty.

Karam’s lawyer, Michael Reed, QC, told Justice Patricia Courtney that Parker, a website developer from Havelock North, controlled the Counterspin website where statements defamatory of Karam had appeared.

Purkiss, who has not turned up today to defend the court action, was responsible for defamatory comments on social media, Reed said.

Reed said the media had picked up on the men’s campaign and made matters worse by “giving their soapbox an air of legitimacy”.

“Without question it has been the worst four years of Mr Karam’s life.”

Worst four years of Joe Karam’s life? I don’t believe it.

Reed said what was “masquerading as Justice For Robin Bain was nothing but spite for Joe Karam”.

It was a “most egregious, spiteful and vindictive campaign of defamation against [Karam]” to which Parker and Purkiss “cannot mount any tenable defence”.

I’m a member of the Facebook group(s) Justice For Robin Bain.

I’m not a member out of spite for Joe Karam. I’m a member because I seek Justice For Robin Bain.

I resent Reed’s comments. Who’s defaming who?

Reed said the defendants claimed Karam’s support of Bain was “purely cynical, his interest pecuniary”.

They likened Karam to the Nazis and North Korea, and labelled him “a tyrant, a pimp and someone who aided and abetted a murderer”.

Karam’s been running a trial by media that has found Robin Bain guilty of the Bain murders. But Robin Bain has never stood trial. There isn’t any evidence that he committed the murders. He is not guilty.

In view of this, it’s no wonder that people would speculate as to Karam’s motives in aiding and abetting David Bain. Karam needs to harden up.

Purely cynical, his interest pecuniary? One shouldn’t speculate as to people’s motives. But Karam is also no stranger to such speculation. He presents hearsay as fact when it comes to Robin Bain’s supposed motive. Covering up his incest with his daughter Laniet? Could be. It could also be that David Bain’s motive was covering up incest with his sister Laniet. But it’s all hearsay.

My own view is that Karam has been fooled by a homicidal psychopath.

The forensic evidence points overwhelmingly to David’s guilt.

This entry was posted in JFK. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Who’s defaming who?

  1. reed says:

    What do you make of defamation?

    The law looks unjust to me (except when there is intention to gain or cause loss by lying – which I think is covered by other laws – causing loss by deception, fraud).

    Eye for eye, tooth for tooth principle means defamers can be publicly criticised or called names.

  2. Richard says:

    What do you make of defamation?

    I think that criminalising defamation is unlibertarian, unjust and wrong. Defamation laws are restrictions on freedom of speech.

  3. Harriet Bond says:

    yes I agree, totally!
    whichever way it goes, it will be appealed, you can be sure of that.

  4. John says:

    Defamation doesn’t count when you are dead.

    The forensic evidence in this case discounts Robin, I knew Robin, he took a spider out of his classroom and released it , and then gave his pupils a lesson on the sanctity of life, after they wanted to “squish it”.

    Karam and the Bain legal team have “defamed” Robin, a good man who cannot defend himself. David has never even said he thought his father did it. “If I didn’t do it he must have” is as close as he has gotten.

    He never went on the stand in the 2nd Trial

    Vic and Kent are very unfortunate that Mr Karam can sue them. and I hope that he does not destroy them financially.

    I found it also interesting reading how much Legal aid was paying to Mr Karem as a Legal adviser when he is not a lawyer as far as I know.

    Am I am scared to say even this much in a public forum, which in my opinion is Mr Karam’s true Goal in this lawsuit, to silence and discord that will detract from compensation claims.
    However this is only my opinion.

    • Sue says:

      I feel for these brave men who have only tried to defend a dead man’s reputation.
      A man against who there was no evidence linking him to the murder of his family.
      Karam, as I recall, insisted for years that David Bain just wanted the chance to take the stand to defend himself.
      Yet when the time came, he declined to do so.
      That speaks volumes.
      “In my opinion”, I hasten to add!

  5. Harriet Bond says:

    I agree, it took a lot of guts to defend this case, not to mention 4 years of Kent’s life.
    Much of the MSM are already chilled by Karam’s legal threats in past, which have included many people who have settled out of court. This will make things even worse.
    A hollow victory to add to the long list.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *