GUILTY UK - Dr. Saman Mir Sacharvi, 49, & Vian Mangrio, 14, found dead, Reedley, 1 Oct 2020 *ARREST*

[Des-]

Just as a matter of discussion, had he raped either victim wearing a condom there wouldn't be DNA evidence. I'm not saying he did. I'm saying that would negate finding DNA evidence.

Some resistance marks could be there like nail scratches, some bruises, rashes , hair etc etc

 

[HongKongPhooey]

Just as a matter of discussion, had he raped either victim wearing a condom there wouldn't be DNA evidence. I'm not saying he did. I'm saying that would negate finding DNA evidence.

Also, from post #2 on this thread the young girl's body was "badly burnt"

 

[Des-]

Man accused of murder of mum and daughter says they were alive when he left


Mr Nawaz asked: “Where was Dr Sacharvi at that time?”

Khan said: “At that time she was in the kitchen.”

Mr Nawaz said: “Where was Vian Mangrio?”

He said: “Vian at the time was upstairs.”

Mr Nawaz said: “Were they dead or alive?”

Khan replied: “Alive.”

 

[Tortoise]

I wonder what work he did in the 10 hours he was there.

 

[Des-]

I wonder what work he did in the 10 hours he was there.

If any builder doing 3,4 things repair ,
And working single handedly, 9-12 hours are nothing .
I have experienced it few times.

 

[HongKongPhooey]

I wonder what work he did in the 10 hours he was there.

Emptied the loft!

 

[Des-]

Emptied the loft!

What could be the motive of murder.
he became family friend.
He had easy access of the house,
She was under influence of drugs
Then why not only stealing/robbery why murder.(as he told to the court he was keeping the jewellery bag for security purposes, he did that in past as well)
it is still not clear why murder
Must be some other reason for murder.

or keep an eye on next to the kin.

 

[Tortoise]

What could be the motive of murder.
he became family friend.
He had easy access of the house,
She was under influence of drugs
Then why not only stealing/robbery why murder.(as he told to the court he was keeping the jewellery bag for security purposes, he did that in past as well)
it is still not clear why murder
Must be some other reason for murder.

or keep an eye on next to the kin.

It must have been to steal her jewellery worth tens of thousands of £s. Premeditated with the cable in the room and the petrol can.

If she woke up after the drugs wore off she would know she had let him in the house, been drugged and all her jewellery was missing, it doesn't take a genius to work out who did it.

Then he stays there to kill Vian after school because she will report finding her mum dead and tell police he was the builder in their house, and also to try to set up a story that she was acting strangely writing on the walls, and had killed her mum and then herself. Even though Vian died of asphyxiation on the living room floor, and was then burned beyond recognition, with the petrol can in the bedroom, which is not a self inflicted injury or a possible sequence of events. Neither could Dr Saman have strangled herself and then set herself on fire.

Then he hides that he was in the house at all, even though he was in it for 10 hours, and now admits it, and his wife gives him a false alibi.

 

[Des-]

It must have been to steal her jewellery worth tens of thousands of £s. Premeditated with the cable in the room and the petrol can.

If she woke up after the drugs wore off she would know she had let him in the house, been drugged and all her jewellery was missing, it doesn't take a genius to work out who did it.

Then he stays there to kill Vian after school because she will report finding her mum dead and tell police he was the builder in their house, and also to try to set up a story that she was acting strangely writing on the walls, and had killed her mum and then herself. Even though Vian died of asphyxiation on the living room floor, and was then burned beyond recognition, with the petrol can in the bedroom, which is not a self inflicted injury or a possible sequence of events. Neither could Dr Saman have strangled herself and then set herself on fire.

Then he hides that he was in the house at all, even though he was in it for 10 hours, and now admits it, and his wife gives him a false alibi.

Bleak theory!
Understand it carefully, its human nature people will only struggle till they fulfil their needs, if just £10 was fulfilling his need why someone will think of murdering.
“Murdering is something else”
Moreover in any conditions he would be the only main suspect.
He could deny stealing jewellery to dr , he was her trustworthy handyman. And his liabilities. ,bank record should be checked.
Writing patterns should be matched. Finger prints on writing tool(pen , pencil, spray paints, paint brush etc)
Finger print on petrol can.
And how vian badly burnt and dr wasn’t.

think this ways who will be the biggest beneficial after that incident.

 

[Tortoise]

Bleak theory!
Understand it carefully, its human nature people will only struggle till they fulfil their needs, if just £10 was fulfilling his need why someone will think of murdering.
“Murdering is something else”
Moreover in any conditions he would be the only main suspect.
He could deny stealing jewellery to dr , he was her trustworthy handyman. And his liabilities. ,bank record should be checked.
Writing patterns should be matched. Finger prints on writing tool(pen , pencil, spray paints, paint brush etc)
Finger print on petrol can.
And how vian badly burnt and dr wasn’t.

think this ways who will be the biggest beneficial after that incident.

Is there a reason you are dismissing the "only main suspect" from your theory of the murder? How do you know £10 fulfilled his wants, not his needs?

 

[Des-]

As

Is there a reason you are dismissing the "only main suspect" from your theory of the murder? How do you know £10 fulfilled his wants, not his needs?

Absolutely a valid reason! Not yet concluded definite motive.

he raped them or wanted to rape - physically desperate. (Not proven)

Trustworthy family friend handyman had a easy access to her home he could very easily steal jewellery/ valueless. ( his monetary needs/ wants , lifestyle , mortgage status had not been assessed)

If family friend handyman is a murderer, his criminal thinking should be prove by checking his past criminal records, and presented to the court & jury.
All of a sudden no one can make a mood to murder people, unless a person is mad or criminal minded.

she was drugged( what was the level of it)

time of death not disclosed.

this case theory has very confusing theory , he needed jewellery, want to rape ,want to kill etc etc. And objective is still not clear..

he could be the “ only main suspect” reason , he knows them , he had easy access to their house, familiar to their routine , he came in CCTV , he brought things for her ,wine of her choice, 10 hours in the house , etc etc.

Everyone knows what will be the police initial thinking, basic patterns very well and look Only one person was part of this investigation. All the Situation was roaming around him only.

My independent opinion So many flaws of investigation .

 

[Tortoise]

The wine is a peculiar feature of the case. It could represent his desire to woo the doctor, and if she rejected him he might have a very quick temper and humiliation. If it was opened and he slipped in a pill, then he washed up the glass, it could be how he drugged her, a choice of wine or a fruit smoothie in case she wouldn't accept alcohol. Stealing her jewellery then became an after thought.

Dr Saman might have had a disagreement with him and he felt insulted. Motive isn't always obvious or known.

 

[Des-]

The wine is a peculiar feature of the case. It could represent his desire to woo the doctor, and if she rejected him he might have a very quick temper and humiliation. If it was opened and he slipped in a pill, then he washed up the glass, it could be how he drugged her, a choice of wine or a fruit smoothie in case she wouldn't accept alcohol. Stealing her jewellery then became an after thought.

Dr Saman might have had a disagreement with him and he felt insulted. Motive isn't always obvious or known.

Medical reports can tell it that dr was a regularly using alcohol or it was her first time.
And also khan psychiatric assessment can prove his quick temper issues.
Which is missing.
All assumptions theories facts are missing.
Everyone has a motive, and it has to be known at least.

 

[Legally Bland]

Doesn't look like there was any evidence today. Shame, as I was looking forward to reading about the cross-examination of the accused.

Preston Crown Court 5 T20207513
T20217108
Rabia Fatima Shahbaz
Shabaz Khan
Details: Trial (Part Heard) - No Event - 10:01
Trial (Part Heard) - Case adjourned until 11:20 - 11:03
Trial (Part Heard) - No Event - 11:23
Trial (Part Heard) - No Event - 11:57
Trial (Part Heard) - Case adjourned until 10:00 - 13:01

https://www.thelawpages.com/court-hearings-lists/Preston-Crown-Court.php

 

[TootsieFootsie]

There have been cases here in Australia where a tradesman employed to do a job, murdered their client, like this one.
He's argued with the lady's husband about the amount of money he was owed.
He murdered the lady, than stole cash and jewelry.

Sydney tradesman jailed for at least 17 years over bashing death

And another
Killer shouts 'I'm sorry' in court to family of murdered Melbourne couple
A Melbourne plasterer, who has admitted to killing a Moonee Ponds couple over payment for a job has broken down in court and shouted an apology to the victims' families.

Once again, a dispute over payment.

It does happen.

 

[Catmommy]

Evidence is necessary to prove a crime, not motive.

 

[Catmommy]

Most of us are not murderers or sexual deviates so it is impossible to think as one would. All any of us have here is conjecture. And logic.

 

[Des-]

Evidence is necessary to prove a crime, not motive.

Only presence shouldn’t be the substantial evidence.
Evidence should be DNA , forensic , finger prints on her neck and body, writing tool availability, drugs alcohol report , footage how he killed etc etc.

 

[Legally Bland]

There was some evidence today:
_____

Asking about what had happened at the house, prosecutor David McLachlan QC asked Mr Khan if he accepted the deaths were not caused by jinns, a type of Islamic spirit.

Mr Khan replied he did and that he was now "taking eight to 10 tablets a day, so my brain feels slightly better".

He rejected Mr McLachlan's assertion that he "put something around Dr Sacharvi's neck and... pulled it as tight as you could until she stopped breathing" and that he used Vian's school tie to kill her.

Mr Khan said he was "like a family friend" to the pair and that Vian was "like a daughter".

He said he did not know how the pair's mobile phones, which are still missing, ended up being disconnected or why their internet router became inactive on the day of their deaths, adding that neither mother nor daughter had complained to him about the problems while he was there.

Burnley murder accused accepts spirit did not kill doctor and daughter

 

[Catmommy]

I am glad I was mistaken and the accused is testifying. This is a plus.