Mark Lundy

[Uriah Heap 481]

I see Mark Lundy is back for another Trial.

I reckon he'll look at Ewen MacDonald, David Bain, Chris Kahui and Oscar Pistorious and he'll be expecting to be found, "Not Guilty".

[DC9 203]

How does Ewen Macdonald fit with those other three?

[Uriah Heap 481]

How does Ewen Macdonald fit with those other three?

 

He was charged with murder, the case against him appeared compelling, he was found not guilty.

[beerwithduncan 724]

What we think from our lounges in these sorts of court cases means very little. I thought O.J Simpson was as guilty as a man could be yet found not guilty.

 

Ewen Macdonald strikes me as a very dangerous individual who I was convinced was guilty of murdering Scott Guy.

Not sure either way about David Bain

I never felt Chris Kahui murdered his twins. His partner on the other hand stunk like rotten fish.

Oscar Pistorious murdered his girlfriend without doubt.

Mark Lundy in my opinion as guilty as O.J Simpson.

[DC9 203]

OJ getting off showed how corrupt the US justice system was and is.

[Uriah Heap 481]

The defence have opened with the David Bain - Chris Kahui move. Accuse another family member.

[bloke 1,232]

The Prosecution have also pulled an old desperate ploy out of the hat by producing some bad arse criminal who claims that Lundy spilled the beans to him in jail about the murder. No doubt this hard arse  receives a large reduction in his sentence.

[beerwithduncan 724]

The defence have opened with the David Bain - Chris Kahui move. Accuse another family member.

 

 

 

I can understand why you are dubious of that defence but the truth is when you have certain types of homicides,the offender is invariably a family member. I don't know what the percentages are but I'm sure they are extremely high.

 

When you look at the Bain case there is one fact almost everyone is in complete agreement on. The offender was a family member. Only question is which family member. I have no leaning either way but if it wasn't David Bain it must have been his father. It would be logical that the defence point the finger at the father regardless of David's guilt or innocence. What other defence could they possibly use? We have to allow for the possibility David is innocent don't we?

 

The infant Kahui twins were also unmistakably murdered by a family member. Once again if it wasn't Chris it must have been another family member. I've seen a lot of guilty people in my life. Everything I saw and heard in relation to Chris screamed out he was not the murderer. The partner on the other hand gave me the complete opposite feel.

[beerwithduncan 724]

The Prosecution have also pulled an old desperate ploy out of the hat by producing some bad arse criminal who claims that Lundy spilled the beans to him in jail about the murder. No doubt this hard arse  receives a large reduction in his sentence.

 

 

Jail yard confessions have been around as long as jails have. Many have been totally discredited when at some later point the finger pointer admitted he lied in court after being promised a sentence reduction etc by the prosecution. Some of these people would kill their someone for $15 so lying in court is not a big stretch for them especially if an incentive is given.

 

Having said that it would be remiss to assume one size fits all. Killing a person is a huge thing. Some murderers for whatever reason feel compelled to tell someone about it. A fellow prisoner is more likely to hear a confession than almost anyone else. Why do some feel they need to talk about their crimes? Perhaps they are proud of committing the ultimate crime that sets them apart from the small time criminals in jail. Perhaps they feel it makes them look like a "hard man" which for some carries a lot of weight in jail. Perhaps they feel they have outsmarted the Police prosecution and just have to share this major achievement with someone. Arrogant people are usually very quick to tell others how brilliant they are.

 

Maybe they feel guilt and just have to tell someone about it. There could be a hundred reasons why the offender blabs.

 

Why talk to a fellow prisoner? Perhaps the offender feels there are two sides. Those on the outside trying to put him in prison. He cant talk to them. Then you have those inside. They can relate to each other. They are on the same side. They feel less likely of being judged by someone else locked up for their criminal offending. 

 

Many jail yard confessions have real merit and highlight the true nature of the offender. The trick is finding out which ones are real and which ones are bullshit. I know this seems naive but I feel they should remove any and all incentives for jail house criminals to testify in court. Why then would a crook go to court to give evidence against another crook? How about because he was so disgusted by any father who would brutally murder his own daughter then brag about it? How about because it's the right thing to do, and that means something to most people even some criminals.

 

If you were told the jailhouse witness giving evidence against Lundy had received no incentive whatsoever to testify would you give his evidence more credence and value?

[crustyngrizzly 1,700]

 

The defence have opened with the David Bain - Chris Kahui move. Accuse another family member.

 Looks like they have been watching too much BROADCHURCH.

[Ashoka 1,179]

beerwithduncan...

 

The jailhouse confession has no credibility in my eyes for the very reasons you have outlined. The fact that the prosecution are using it in the Lundy case makes me think, for the first time, that Mr Lundy may not be guilty. I have to say that the evidence surrounding the brother puts doubt about Mr Lundy's guilt very much in the frame, to my mind.

 

The police use of the jailhouse confession reached its lowest ebb, in my opinion, in the murder case which resulted in the conviction of David Wayne Tamihere. The prosecution provided four different jailhouse witnesses who each gave a different version of events. Then, when the body of one of the murder victims was found, the location gave the lie to each and every story.

 

It's bad enough when the bad guys lie.

When the good guys start talking garbage, that's when we all should start worrying.

 

All the best.

Ashoka

[Chestnut 3,151]

Usually I'm a little skeptical about wikipedia, working in the tertiary education environment as I do, however this overview of the Lundy case to date is quite good and regularly updated.  It may be of interest to some with regards to background information, evidence not disclosed, additional evidence sourced and general observations, along with links to other sources via the references.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lundy_murders

[beerwithduncan 724]

beerwithduncan...

 

The jailhouse confession has no credibility in my eyes for the very reasons you have outlined. The fact that the prosecution are using it in the Lundy case makes me think, for the first time, that Mr Lundy may not be guilty. I have to say that the evidence surrounding the brother puts doubt about Mr Lundy's guilt very much in the frame, to my mind.

 

The police use of the jailhouse confession reached its lowest ebb, in my opinion, in the murder case which resulted in the conviction of David Wayne Tamihere. The prosecution provided four different jailhouse witnesses who each gave a different version of events. Then, when the body of one of the murder victims was found, the location gave the lie to each and every story.

 

It's bad enough when the bad guys lie.

When the good guys start talking garbage, that's when we all should start worrying.

 

All the best.

Ashoka

 

Hey Ashoka,

 

If someone was convicted solely on a jailhouse confession I'd be very uncomfortable. Having said that if a murderer does actually tell a fellow prisoner what really occurred then that evidence should have at least some merit worth considering? If not murderers would be free to confess all in Prison knowing nothing can come of those confessions.

 

As for David Tamihere. I must admit I feel no compassion whatsoever toward that man. After a life time of criminal offending he brutally murdered an Auckland woman Mary Barcham by caving in her skull with a rifle butt . That murder did not receive the merit it deserved because the victim was "only" a stripper,in fact the charge he was convicted on was ultimately only manslaughter. She was still someone's treasured daughter who had her life taken by a human predator. There were numerous unsolved murders of Auckland sex workers in the same time frame. God knows how many others were down to Tamihere.

 

The jailhouse confessions he allegedly made about the murders of the Swedish tourists were dubious but only part of a lot of evidence used to convict him. His brother John used his position and profile at the time to advocate David's innocence which is not something many other murderers are fortunate enough to receive. It also grinds on me when I hear David Tamihere now complaining about age related health issues. There is one young woman and possible two young Swedish tourists that will never experience aged related health issues due to the diabolical actions of David Tamihere.

 

It's not common for murderers to fully admit their crimes. Even murderers caught red handed will still claim innocence.

 

Tamihere had a wife supporting him on the outside. He managed to convince her he was innocent. He had very little else. That support would mean everything to a man with nothing. Would that support still been there if he'd admitted to her and everyone else what he'd done? Yes the jail house informants had a vested interest in lying but so did David Tamihere.

[beerwithduncan 724]

Usually I'm a little skeptical about wikipedia, working in the tertiary education environment as I do, however this overview of the Lundy case to date is quite good and regularly updated.  It may be of interest to some with regards to background information, evidence not disclosed, additional evidence sourced and general observations, along with links to other sources via the references.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lundy_murders

 

 

Very interesting read Maria

[Ashoka 1,179]

beerwithduncan...

 

I have had grave reservations regarding this matter since its inception.

The overt manipulation of the media by the high profile detective in charge of the case was only one factor.

The garbage trotted out by the bribed (and this is an accurate description, in my view) jailhouse witnesses was discredited when the body of the male victim was found, as was the watch evidence tendered at the trial (a la Arthur Allan Thomas).

I had no sympathy for Tamihere at the time, but I don't want a murderer running around free either, and that's what we got, in my opinion.

 

Cheers.

Ashoka

[Ashoka 1,179]

Chesnut...

 

Thank you for posting the link.

I found the information therein very interesting indeed.

 

All the best.

Ashoka

[Uriah Heap 481]

beerwithduncan...

 

The jailhouse confession has no credibility in my eyes for the very reasons you have outlined. The fact that the prosecution are using it in the Lundy case makes me think, for the first time, that Mr Lundy may not be guilty. I have to say that the evidence surrounding the brother puts doubt about Mr Lundy's guilt very much in the frame, to my mind.

 

 

 

All the best.

Ashoka

 

I'd agree with "jail house confessions". They have little credabilty and smacks of desperation.

However, I recall a TV documentary that interviewed former friends of the Lundy's. They mostly noted Mark Lundy as an egotistical, braggard. In light of this the Prosecution might be going to say this personality type would skite about his crime to a cellmate.

[Username 36]

Lundy is as guilty as fark.

 

A friend who worked at a car groomers in Palmy at the time confirmed that in the few days following Christine and Amber's gruesome murders, Lundy brought his car in to be groomed. The police interviewed my friend and his colleagues about this event but for whatever reason choose not to use it as part of the prosecution case - I guess because getting a car groomed didn't prove he was a murderer. But it did point to Lundy being a cold and uncaring human with something to hide.

 

Also the footage of the funerals was compelling viewing as it was a clearly an acting job from Lundy. An overacting job at that. 

[aquaman 1,352]

Yes, guilty as sin. Big useless heap of garbage. Agree, the funeral was compelling viewing with the big fat slob wailing and collapsing like a beached whale. Many similarity's to that other wailer Bain. Blame a relation, timing of computers, both educated, both white, both middle class, both evil.

[aquaman 1,352]

Lundy is as guilty as fark.

 

A friend who worked at a car groomers in Palmy at the time confirmed that in the few days following Christine and Amber's gruesome murders, Lundy brought his car in to be groomed. The police interviewed my friend and his colleagues about this event but for whatever reason choose not to use it as part of the prosecution case - I guess because getting a car groomed didn't prove he was a murderer. But it did point to Lundy being a cold and uncaring human with something to hide.

 

Also the footage of the funerals was compelling viewing as it was a clearly an acting job from Lundy. An overacting job at that. 

It would be interesting to know wether Lundy was of the habit of having his car groomed, or was this a one off event.

[bloke 1,232]

A car grooming is highly unlikely to remove any DNA that would incriminate Lundy. No doubt The Police could not find any otherwise they would have acted.

 

People grieve  in different ways  and at the time Lundy's performance at the funeral did make me suspicious. Last year I went to the funeral of an  old work mate's wife.

 

I knew my old work mate as a hard bugger but when the coffin was being wheeled out he put on an act similar to Lundy. You simply cannot convict someone on the  way they react at a funeral.

 

I am keen to follow the trial but at this early stage I cannot say from evidence provided that I would find him guilty i.e. beyond reasonable doubt.

[aquaman 1,352]

I would as i would Bain. Common sense seems to have deserted jury's in the last two decades. OJ Simpson syndrome.  Scott Watson comes into this category. Lawyers these days seem to come up with an alternative scenario no matter how far fetched, and jurys cling to it. Judges summings up are not helping jurys either, rather they seem to throw a lifeline to jurys to aquit. This in my opinion is some of the reasons so many of these cases seem to end up in retrials.

[Uriah Heap 481]

 

I am keen to follow the trial but at this early stage I cannot say from evidence provided that I would find him guilty i.e. beyond reasonable doubt.

 

You're smart bloke, bloke.

While there will be plenty that points to him as the most likely killer, there is no evidence we know of, that means Lundy can be found guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Not when compared to other cases I mentioned in an earlier Post.

[Uriah Heap 481]

And now the Black Widow from Christchurch is about to appeal her conviction.

Her Lawyer is arguing that "Overseas experts" don't agree that the hubby was poisoned. 

Don't you just love those "overseas experts"?? If you look hard enough you will always find an overseas expert happy to disprove what the local experts have said.  

[bloke 1,232]

Uriah Heap (great band, I remember " Very Heavy Very Humble"  well)  I did not follow the previous trial closely so I am looking to follow this retrial with a lot more interest.

 

All I  recall from  the first trial was the Prosecution theory that  Lundy drove from Petone in peak traffic to Palmerston North, did the deed and returned to Petone  in a ridiculously short time frame. I note that The Prosecution has now changed their theory for the retrial.