David Bain leaves the court after Justice Graham Panckhurst completed his summing up. Photo / Simon Baker
The jury that will decide the fate of David Bain has resumed deliberating after a lunch break.
Earlier this morning, they asked two questions of the judge.
Justice Graham Panckhurst again defined "beyond reasonable doubt" after being asked to "reiterate the rules".
"There are no rules as such relating to
reasonable doubt. It's part of the standard of proof," Justice Panckhurst said.
He said the burden of proof is on the Crown to prove the case against Bain.
Justice Panckhurst said Bain is to be assumed innocent until proven guilty - not "probably guilty" or "very likely" guilty.
He said it was not possible to prove with "absolute certainty" and that was not the standard required.
"Reasonable doubt is honest and reasonable uncertainty about guilt, after careful and impartial consideration of evidence," said Justice Panckhurst.
He said if after considering the evidence they do have doubts, or they are not sure, then they must acquit.
Justice Panckhurst was also asked by the jury to redefine his comment
made yesterday that "it must be David to the exclusion of Robin".
He said there was not "magic" to the phrase.
"The Crown must prove beyond reasonable doubt that it was David, the
proof positive necessarily excludes Robin," Justice Panckhurst said.
He said the phrase goes to the crux of the case, meaning that they
must decide: "Was it Robin or was it David", the question Justice
Panckhurst asked of the jury yesterday in his summing up.
