NOT GUILTY South Africa - Anni Dewani, 28, shot to death, Gugulethu, 13 Nov 2010 #5

[Interested Bystander]

Should honeymoon murder accused Shrien Dewani be acquitted?

Yes 22%
No 78%

http://ewn.co.za/#divController

Dewani IMO needs to be put on the stand to answer questions.

I don't think he safely can be convicted on the current evidence as it was so very poor BUT I think he should have been put on the stand to answer a lot of unanswered questions. I have ignored all the hearsay I have seen posted and everything the Red Tops in the UK have had to say as they are notoriously unreliable and will embroider any story to sell the paper but I do think in a murder case the accused should always have to give evidence.

 

[PrimeSuspect]

Shrien Dewani urged to explain himself on the witness stand

Anni's family want Shrien Dewani to face unanswered questions from night of murder.
Shrien has reportedly packed his bags in the hope that she will dismiss the charges against him and allow him to return to England as a free man without having to give evidence in court.
But Ashok Hindocha, Anni's uncle, has issued a statement calling on Shrien to go into the witness box and tell the court what really happened.
"We want to hear it in his own words," he said. "We have waited four years for this to happen and it would not be right if he does not do it."


http://www.theweek.co.uk/crime/shri...in-himself-on-the-witness-stand#ixzz3K68sXOJ9

 

[PrimeSuspect]

Here is what we have heard so far today:

11.00am: Prosecutor Adrian Mopp argues that Shrien's version of events should be tested. He has pointed to several problems with the defence's case. Shrien claims he had no idea that the taxi he and Anni were travelling in would be hijacked, let alone that his wife would be shot. Mopp asks if it was therefore merely a coincidence that Anni supposedly wanted to return to the Gugulethu township at the exact time that their taxi driver had planned to run into the two hitmen. "The court is led to believe that it is completely fortuitous that two people are waiting and, lo and behold, the deceased wanted to go back into the township at that exact time?" said Mopp.

He also notes that Dewani never mentioned to Anni's family that he went to change money on the morning of her murder or that he had been planning a helicopter trip, as he later claimed in his written statement. "The accused's explanation has not been tested," says Mopp. "There is no reference. This is an important bit that cannot be ignored."

1.00pm: Prosecutor Adrian Mopp continues his argument after the lunch break. He has already told the court that Anni's convicted murderers are "not the A-team of contract killers" and could barely organise transport to the intended murder spot. "We are dealing with an amateurish attempt," he told the judge. "If it were not for the killing of the deceased, it would actually be comical, the manner in which this matter was set about." Mopp says there would have had to have been a "conspiracy within a conspiracy" to falsely implicate Shrien Dewani. "It's almost beyond them," he says.

Defence lawyer Francois Van Zyl is given a chance to respond to the prosecution. He points out that even if Shrien turned out to be an appalling witness it would not make the testimony of key witness Zola Tongo any more credible.


http://www.theweek.co.uk/crime/shri...in-himself-on-the-witness-stand#ixzz3K69j7IdP

 

[PrimeSuspect]

I don't think he safely can be convicted on the current evidence as it was so very poor BUT I think he should have been put on the stand to answer a lot of unanswered questions. I have ignored all the hearsay I have seen posted and everything the Red Tops in the UK have had to say as they are notoriously unreliable and will embroider any story to sell the paper but I do think in a murder case the accused should always have to give evidence.

Do you think this poor evidence would secure a conviction in the UK?

 

[newone]

Shrien Dewani urged to explain himself on the witness stand

Anni's family want Shrien Dewani to face unanswered questions from night of murder.
Shrien has reportedly packed his bags in the hope that she will dismiss the charges against him and allow him to return to England as a free man without having to give evidence in court.
But Ashok Hindocha, Anni's uncle, has issued a statement calling on Shrien to go into the witness box and tell the court what really happened.
"We want to hear it in his own words," he said. "We have waited four years for this to happen and it would not be right if he does not do it."


http://www.theweek.co.uk/crime/shri...in-himself-on-the-witness-stand#ixzz3K68sXOJ9

from your link:

"The trial is adjourned until 8 December to give Judge Traverso time to decide whether to continue the trial or allow Dewani to walk free without having to take the witness stand."

Read more: http://www.theweek.co.uk/crime/shri...in-himself-on-the-witness-stand#ixzz3K6DkttjU

To me the Dec 8 date is indulgent and shows blatant disrespect for the PT as well as Anni's family.MOO

I could understand end of this week or Monday Dec 1 at the very latest. On the other hand, making SD sweat and practise his packing and unpacking skills must be making him a bit twitchy.

I missed the trial action this a.m. as I was so engrossed with the outcome of the GJ decision and subsequent rioting in Ferguson MO last night.

I do not believe, even for a nanosecond, that SD is blameless in Anni's death. MOO

 

[jslk]

I, too, agree that there are important problems and discrepancies with SD's account that need to be probed. I am not familiar with the ins and outs of the law/trials in the slightest, and am very surprised about the manner in which this one has unfolded. Do other countries have a system whereby the defence can apply for the trial to be dropped or is this unique to SA? I know there are circumstances where trials are abandoned/dissolved but this is different.

 

[jslk]

(I was offline all of yesterday and it's taken me until now to catch up with it all, thanks for tweets/links [emoji106]).

 

[newone]

I, too, agree that there are important problems and discrepancies with SD's account that need to be probed. I am not familiar with the ins and outs of the law/trials in the slightest, and am very surprised about the manner in which this one has unfolded. Do other countries have a system whereby the defence can apply for the trial to be dropped or is this unique to SA? I know there are circumstances where trials are abandoned/dissolved but this is different.

I don't know much! I am attempting to fast track my knowledge too. My concern with this case is that a woman was murdered ( possibly arranged by someone she loved and trusted).

I wish I had something other than Wiki to rely on at this point. What I found interesting are the following points:

''The effect of false testimony by the accused is usually equivalent to his giving no evidence.[288][289]

The court may itself call witnesses[290][291] where this is necessary for a just decision of the case. The judge is not merely a passive umpire; he is an administrator of justice.[292][293][294][295][296][297]

It would make my day if the Judge insisted on SD answering some questions posed by M'Lady

The court's power to deal with recalcitrant witnesses is regulated in section 189 of the CPA.

The impeachment of witnesses is dealt with in section 190. For the meaning of "hostile witness," and the effect of a declaration of witness as hostile, see, for example, Meyers Trustee v Malan[298] and City Panel Beaters v Bana.[299]

Impeachment of the credit of one's own witness is dealt with in section 190(2), and in R v Loofer[300] and S v Muhiaba.[301] Proof of a previous inconsistent statement does not make that statement evidence against the accused. Other points of the witness's evidence not covered by the deviation may still be accepted by the court.[302] The fact that a witness has lied on one point does not prevent the court from accepting his evidence on another point.[303]''

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_procedure_in_South_Africa

The DT has carped ad nauseum on the ''credibility'' of the three hapless hit team members/witnesses but one would hope to see through that ruse and the part bbm may be what is concerning the DT at this point (MOO)

 

[Interested Bystander]

Do you think this poor evidence would secure a conviction in the UK?

I think the likelihood is that it may not have reached court BUT he was extradited so I could be wrong. These days the CPS likes to see a case pretty well "sewn up" before it gets the go ahead here.

 

[JudgeJudi]

I don't think he safely can be convicted on the current evidence as it was so very poor BUT I think he should have been put on the stand to answer a lot of unanswered questions. I have ignored all the hearsay I have seen posted and everything the Red Tops in the UK have had to say as they are notoriously unreliable and will embroider any story to sell the paper but I do think in a murder case the accused should always have to give evidence.

I very much want to hear his side of the story too. However it's pretty well universal that an accused is not obliged to testify. This can come with great attendant risks though as the Court might have to decide the matter on only one side’s version of events. There was a SA case I read many months ago where this happened and the consequences were pretty severe. IIRC the accused had a reasonable chance of being found either not guilty or guilty of a lesser charge had he chosen to testify, but as he didn't, the Court had to rely on the evidence and testimony of others.

However if an accused does elect to testify, he cannot refuse to answer relevant and otherwise admissible questions, and as you know, cross-examination can be more than a little tough. I don't know how good Mopp is, but I don't think Dewani is another OP who can come up with versions at the drop of a hat.

 

[JudgeJudi]

Keeping Anni's memory alive.

 

[JudgeJudi]

<Respectfully snipped>

''The effect of false testimony by the accused is usually equivalent to his giving no evidence.[288][289]

It would make my day if the Judge insisted on SD answering some questions posed by M'Lady

The impeachment of witnesses is dealt with in section 190. For the meaning of "hostile witness," and the effect of a declaration of witness as hostile, see, for example, Meyers Trustee v Malan[298] and City Panel Beaters v Bana.[299]

The fact that a witness has lied on one point does not prevent the court from accepting his evidence on another point.[303]''

The DT has carped ad nauseum on the ''credibility'' of the three hapless hit team members/witnesses but one would hope to see through that ruse and the part bbm may be what is concerning the DT at this point (MOO)

An accused cannot be forced to testify.

A hostile witness is your own potential witness but one who does not want to testify. A hostile witness, otherwise known as an adverse witness, is one who demonstrates an unwillingness to tell the truth in relation to important matters in the trial. Neither side wants to call a hostile witness as the chances are great that they can cause a lot of damage to your case.

They can be subpoenaed but the net result would be the same. "You can take a horse to water but you can't make it drink".

Your final point about a witness lying on one point but the court accepting his evidence on another point is best illustrated in the OP trial. Masipa J herself said he was a poor witness but nonetheless dismissed virtually the whole of the State's case, a fact that none of us can get over. :stormingmad:

 

[PrimeSuspect]

from your link:

"The trial is adjourned until 8 December to give Judge Traverso time to decide whether to continue the trial or allow Dewani to walk free without having to take the witness stand."

Read more: http://www.theweek.co.uk/crime/shri...in-himself-on-the-witness-stand#ixzz3K6DkttjU

To me the Dec 8 date is indulgent and shows blatant disrespect for the PT as well as Anni's family.MOO

I could understand end of this week or Monday Dec 1 at the very latest. On the other hand, making SD sweat and practise his packing and unpacking skills must be making him a bit twitchy.

I missed the trial action this a.m. as I was so engrossed with the outcome of the GJ decision and subsequent rioting in Ferguson MO last night.

I do not believe, even for a nanosecond, that SD is blameless in Anni's death. MOO

I think the same.

Other thoughts have come to mind about keeping Anni in the car and releasing SD unharmed.

It couldn't have been a hostage situation because SD's phone was taken (SD deleted message from Tongo and his reply just before hijacking), and there is no indication/proof they had prepared a hostage/ransom scenario.

If the reason was to rape her, why drop SD completely unharmed in a highly populated area where he can raise the alarm in minutes, strangely it took him over 10 minutes (which again, we have to take SD's word), :dunno: . Why not beat him up/pistol whip him at least, so he's incapacitated for a long period before he can get to help? These robbers/rapists weren't concerned about buying time, now that is very strange.

So the big question is why kill Anni? Because she can describe her killers, well that goes the same for SD and he was let go. Mngeni and Qwabe had gotten all the money, watches, phones etc. so there was no need to hold her captive.

Anni or SD hid the engagement ring in a hijacked vehicle?

I can't believe Anni firstly, would do that, and secondly, once SD has left and she's all alone in the vehicle with these men, why wouldn't she offer the £25,000 ring for her life? Mngeni would have taken it whether they killed her or not. But she didn't offer it because she didn't know it was hidden in the seat.

Imo, SD is definitely lying about the ring. Okay, this could just be about greed and SD placing no importance on Anni's life being saved. Sad but true. I suppose this is why I get annoyed when people say how much he loved her. :no:

The judge makes two questionable remarks, that SD was robbed of the R4 000 and, about the child locks being on.

My answer to that is SD told Tongo it must look like a robbery. When Dewani is released and finally seeks help, he will have R4 000 on him, it will definitely look suspicious that he wasn't robbed :doh: . I suppose, he could have given it to someone, or thrown it away? Too risky either way, an honest citizen might reveal it to police.

About the child locks being on? Why not I ask? If Anni tries the door, which I would instinctively do also, she could have run off while the men were getting in the vehicle. She could signal SD to do the same or him to her to do it, so he has to at least try to open the door.

Funnily enough, in his own statement he didn't try, because when he was told by Mngeni to get out, he tried the door and it was locked. SD says he was pushed out of the window by Mngeni who by the way, was sitting in the front seat! :shakehead: I wish it was tested if a man of SD's size can actually be pushed out of the rear car window that doesn't fully open by design. Or did Mngeni get out and open the door to let SD out? Hmmm, Strange.

Imo, if this happened anywhere else besides South Africa, SD would have been suspected from the moment he was 'rescued'.

I'm glad we have the threads on Websleuths for Dewani's trial, it is good reference for whatever will happen in the future regarding SD and also, if another incident like this occurs, it can be cited.
Imo, there is plenty of evidence but if the judge can't believe a man would ask a complete stranger to murder his wife, whatever comes after cannot be reconciled. There's the stumbling block. The judge better hope no other case comes to trial about a taxi driver hit man extraordinaire.

This has been about - race, murder, conspiracy, poverty, wealth, sexuality, divorce, sex, language, religion, tourism, greed, pride, lies...... definitely has everything!! :thinking: JMO

 

[newone]

Thanks Prime!

The ring.......makes sense to me that Anni would try to negotiate for her life too ((and rightly so -- the darn ring should have been insured anyways!))

I was thinking that particular model of mini van had an electric rear cargo window and SD could have climbed out that way.

The child locks sure show premeditation (MOO)

 

[JudgeJudi]

I, too, agree that there are important problems and discrepancies with SD's account that need to be probed. I am not familiar with the ins and outs of the law/trials in the slightest, and am very surprised about the manner in which this one has unfolded. Do other countries have a system whereby the defence can apply for the trial to be dropped or is this unique to SA? I know there are circumstances where trials are abandoned/dissolved but this is different.

It does happen in other countries, including the US. If it is done, it occurs once the State has closed its case. I don't know how common it is though but I'm guessing it doesn't happen a lot.

 

[kevin_405]

It does happen in other countries, including the US. If it is done, it occurs once the State has closed its case. I don't know how common it is though but I'm guessing it doesn't happen a lot.

I don't think this is accurate. It can happen any time if evidence is not deemed sufficient or contradictory by defence

 

[PrimeSuspect]

OT -

Gerrie Nel is prosecuting Nico Henning for the hit on his estranged wife, Chanelle, 3 years ago when she was dropping her daughter off at daycare. All the men who were involved in the killing are behind bars, yet Henning is out on bail of R10 Million.

He is supposedly richer than Arnold Pistorius and many believe will never see the inside of a prison. The case kept being postponed, he appeared briefly in the Pretoria District court last week, and now it's postponed until next year for his Defence to make ready for a trial.

Money talks in South Africa, it's very disheartening. Chanelle Henning's parents are still waiting for justice.

http://ewn.co.za/2014/11/13/Nico-Henning-case-postponed

http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/Henning-case-postponed-defence-not-ready-20141113

 

[KING Charles]

Hmm, wonder how far they will get with this!

http://www.sabc.co.za/news/a/ff00e300465eb69b8a499bdcba1181c0/Justice4Anni-seeks-retrial-20141128

 

[JudgeJudi]

I don't think this is accurate. It can happen any time if evidence is not deemed sufficient or contradictory by defence

I was relying on the Criminal Procedure Act, 1977 of South Africa:

174 Accused may be discharged at close of case for prosecution
If, at the close of the case for the prosecution at any trial, the court is of the opinion that there is no evidence that the accused committed the offence referred to in the charge or any offence of which he may be convicted on the charge, it may return a verdict of not guilty.

 

[Estelle]

http://www.sabc.co.za/news/a/ff00e300465eb69b8a499bdcba1181c0/Justice4Anni-seeks-retrial-20141128

The Facebook group, Justice4Anni Dewani, wants a retrial.

The group Justice4Anni Hindocha made up of concerned citizens from around the world have now launched a social media petition, calling for the dismissal of the presiding judge and an investigation into her conduct during the trial. The UK-based spokesperson for the group, Raj Patel, says since the petition went live with the online petition, they've garnered hundreds of signatures and drawn widespread interest.

He says Judge Traverso has shown bias in the trial.

They feel that:

1. the interjections by the Judge have been inappropriate and prejudicial towards the case for the prosecution.

2. she allowed the defence to play out the full extent of their argument

3. but she cut the prosecution short to the extent that key witnesses have been disallowed a voice on this trial

4. we think that's prejudicial.

I agree <modsnip>