The Shrien Dewani Trial

1281282284286287398

Comments

  • bookcoverbookcover Posts: 6,216
    Forum Member
    Section 174 Criminal Procedures Act.

    Case Dismissed Dewani Not Guilty.
  • .Lauren..Lauren. Posts: 7,864
    Forum Member
    She just smiled when she said 'falls well below'. I cannot believe she smiled saying that!

    Poor Hindocha's.
  • ClaireChClaireCh Posts: 5,899
    Forum Member
    let me know if there's an appeal. I've switched her off. if she thinks these guys intended to commit a robbery then god help South Africa.
  • .Lauren..Lauren. Posts: 7,864
    Forum Member
    Yes, legally she's absolutely right. She isn't allowed to let the trial continue purely on the grounds that Dewani might incriminate himself, because this would be a violation of his right to be presumed innocent - it would be like charging someone with a crime based on the possibility they might incriminate themselves when testifying, even though there isn't enough evidence for them to stand trial otherwise.

    But that happens all the time in trials! It's simply that the defence didn't allow it to get that far by putting in the application for dismissal.
  • agent butternutagent butternut Posts: 803
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Leigh-Anne Jansen ‏@LA_JANSEN

    "I realise there's strong public opinion that the accused should be placed in the box. I've heard the plight of the Hindochas"

    Traverso: "There is no evidence on which a reasonable court can convict the accused"

    Traverso: "The evidence of the accused cannot strengthen the State's case."

    Traverso: "Application granted. The accused is found not guilty"

    Dewani family in tears. Group hug. State and Defence teams shake hands

    Screams from the public gallery "they paid them" and "Mr. Mopp you must appeal"
  • ClaireChClaireCh Posts: 5,899
    Forum Member
    Judge recognises the "Anni wanted to see the township" attempt by Dewani to shift locus of decision could implicate him but implies that this is in effect Dewani incriminating himself and is not allowed.

    TWISTED.

    :o:o:o
  • jzeejzee Posts: 25,498
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Only liars give testimony against millionaires in South Africa.
  • gold2040gold2040 Posts: 3,049
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Just got push notification of case dismissal
  • bootyachebootyache Posts: 15,462
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Wonder will there be another trial with Mblombo?


    This could go on.
  • .Lauren..Lauren. Posts: 7,864
    Forum Member
    I don't understand how she could say that Dewani being a poor witness and being inconsistent wouldn't help the state case, when that is exactly why she dismissed the prosecutions case because Tongo was a poor witness!

    The logic here baffles me, you can't apply one rule for and not the other.
  • bootyachebootyache Posts: 15,462
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Yes, legally she's absolutely right. She isn't allowed to let the trial continue purely on the grounds that Dewani might incriminate himself, because this would be a violation of his right to be presumed innocent - it would be like charging someone with a crime based on the possibility they might incriminate themselves when testifying, even though there isn't enough evidence for them to stand trial otherwise.


    So, does the same happen over here in trials?
  • franciefrancie Posts: 31,089
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    it will be interesting to see how this verdict affects his health now he is a free man.
  • Moody BlueMoody Blue Posts: 5,680
    Forum Member
    AC......always in the way!
  • Bedlam_maidBedlam_maid Posts: 5,921
    Forum Member
    Good result imo.
  • benjaminibenjamini Posts: 32,066
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Highly controversial. So many questions that will remain unanswered . What a shame for the Hindotchas . Perhaps a civil case will be brought where the standard required is not so high.
  • .Lauren..Lauren. Posts: 7,864
    Forum Member
    So am I right in saying the main thing the whole 'money' issue hinged on, the helicopter, trip was just never explored?

    i can't help thinking that with a stronger prosecution, this would have gone to him on on stand.

    I understand legally the reason for dismissal, but I do think the logic she used to get there is shaky at best.
  • ClaireChClaireCh Posts: 5,899
    Forum Member
    so give Tongo a reduced sentence then. Anni was shot accidentally, but he lied when he admitted intending to murder Anni.
  • neelianeelia Posts: 24,186
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Not a key point but wtf is the rationale for making someone stand through all that. In such a stressful situation (even if you are expecting to walk). I'd have passed out long since.
  • Geelong CatGeelong Cat Posts: 4,583
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    .Lauren. wrote: »
    But that happens all the time in trials! It's simply that the defence didn't allow it to get that far by putting in the application for dismissal.

    It usually happens when the prosecution case is strong enough to convict the defendant in the first place, thus forcing him or her to testify. If it isn't then the defendant probably wouldn't testify at all.

    Legally she has no choice. She isn't allowed to say "the evidence isn't strong enough to convict, but Dewani might incriminate himself so I'm going to let the trial continue". As I said before, it would be like saying "there isn't enough evidence to take the defendant to trial, but we'll do it anyway just in case he or she says something incriminating when testifying".
  • neelianeelia Posts: 24,186
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    benjamini wrote: »
    Highly controversial. So many questions that will remain unanswered . What a shame for the Hindotchas . Perhaps a civil case will be brought where the standard required is not so high.

    As I understand it the civil case they are considering is for deception re the marriage. I wonder what the potential is for taking a civil case for the murder in another country to where the murder happened.
  • Big Boy BarryBig Boy Barry Posts: 35,293
    Forum Member
    SA prosecutors are useless. They couldn't prosecute a chicken for being a bird. Comical.
  • Geelong CatGeelong Cat Posts: 4,583
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    bootyache wrote: »
    So, does the same happen over here in trials?

    I haven't looked into UK law, but I highly doubt someone would be charged with a crime on the grounds that they might say something to incriminate themselves during the trial. That's the basic principle she's applying here.
  • benjaminibenjamini Posts: 32,066
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I would not want any of my loved ones sent to prison on such terrible evidence. There are undoubtedly many unanswered questions but on what has been presented then this was the correct decision. Sadly for the Hindotchas.
  • bootyachebootyache Posts: 15,462
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Oh my good God..

    What's her name for Sky news dragging at Anni's sister arm in the car for a comment.


    Jesus wept. :o:o
  • benjaminibenjamini Posts: 32,066
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    neelia wrote: »
    As I understand it the civil case they are considering is for deception re the marriage. I wonder what the potential is for taking a civil case for the murder in another country to where the murder happened.

    No idea. Perhaps then can pursue it in the UK ?
Sign In or Register to comment.