Boots, she was talking about whether a Section 174 dismissal can be appealed.
If a trial runs on then a judge's actual decision can often be appealed, but legal views aren't in agreement about whether a case being thrown out can be appealed.
Thanks.
Were there conflicting views reported in the media/news by other legel heads do you know?
And if there were, any chance of any links. Don't worry if it's a lot of trouble.
Whilst it would've been interesting to hear Shrien's version of events, I think this was the right decision. He didn't do it. Whilst I understand why Anni's family wanted to hear Shrien speak, it seems to me that the rightful anger they have for him sleeping with prostitutes on the side has clouded their judgement and they just want him to pay for her death, whether he ordered it or not. I hope the guy with the immunity goes on trial and they eventually come to realise the truth.
I wish you'd been on the prosecution team. You hopeless and Claire would be the core team uzman in charge of forensic experiments . Mr White do the co-ordination and take charge of the office while Javed booty and I liaise with the family.
:D:D
And of course we'd be up against Elbraddo for the defence, assisted by Jeeeezzz.
Whilst it would've been interesting to hear Shrien's version of events, I think this was the right decision. He didn't do it. Whilst I understand why Anni's family wanted to hear Shrien speak, it seems to me that the rightful anger they have for him sleeping with prostitutes on the side has clouded their judgement and they just want him to pay for her death, whether he ordered it or not. I hope the guy with the immunity goes on trial and they eventually come to realise the truth.
If Anni's family are thinking about filing a lawsuit against SD because he was bisexual, then they are clearly mental. That'll get thrown out straight away. He was wrong to cheat on Anni but bloody hell I think he has suffered enough.
If the Hindochas had known about SDs sexuality, they would not have supported the marriage, which includes not paying 2£200k for the wedding.
Couple of things. The Hindochas have gone on record saying that the Bombay wedding was not legal and Anni was not legally married. In this case, how can they bring a case against SD? I suppose it was a verbal marriage contract - is that enforceable.
In any case, when one enters into marriage, can one not lie about ones sexual past? I can understand bringing a case if lies about sexual behaviour causes bodily harm (i.e. someone infects a partner with an STD or HIV) but apart from that surely a court is not going to rule on something like this. At least I hope not.
Were there conflicting views reported in the media/news by other legel heads do you know?
And if there were, any chance of any links. Don't worry if it's a lot of trouble.
I did search myself and couldn't find any.
Just posted within the hour, watch this video where an expert says that if the application had been dismissed it couldn't have been appealed, but seeing it was granted the state can appeal. (That's probably why there's a bit of confusion.)
But he says only appealed on a point of law, so I assume not on the merits of the case.
BIG BUT THOUGH - what's the point? There's a man taking a one-way trip on a private jet out of South Africa tomorrow.
Couple of things. The Hindochas have gone on record saying that the Bombay wedding was not legal and Anni was not legally married. In this case, how can they bring a case against SD? I suppose it was a verbal marriage contract - is that enforceable.
In any case, when one enters into marriage, can one not lie about ones sexual past? I can understand bringing a case if lies about sexual behaviour causes bodily harm (i.e. someone infects a partner with an STD or HIV) but apart from that surely a court is not going to rule on something like this. At least I hope not.
They were not legally married but the ceremony cost a fair whack - money that Anni's dad would not have paid had he not believed SD's was as he portrayed himself.
One should be able to lie about one's sexual past but not if doing so you obtain money by deception.
In any case, when one enters into marriage, can one not lie about ones sexual past? I can understand bringing a case if lies about sexual behaviour causes bodily harm (i.e. someone infects a partner with an STD or HIV) but apart from that surely a court is not going to rule on something like this. At least I hope not.
I agree with you.
It's not generally illegal to lie and cheat in relationships. Not under Western legal systems anyway, Sharia law is another story.
Just posted within the hour, watch this video where an expert says that if the application had been dismissed it couldn't have been appealed, but seeing it was granted the state can appeal. (That's probably why there's a bit of confusion.)
But he says only appealed on a point of law, so I assume not on the merits of the case.
BIG BUT THOUGH - what's the point? There's a man taking a one-way trip on a private jet out of South Africa tomorrow.
Could the trip be halted pending an appeal? I am really spurred that SD is waiting until tomorrow to leave, I half expected a helicopter outside the court. (Thought of that before I realised why helicopters were in my mind)
I'd never heard of conditional immunity (unless the condition was giving truthful evidence). Is that the condition considered to be broken?
Everything about the deal with Mbolombo has been shrouded in secrecy from the beginning, including the conditions of his immunity. But I have read the term "conditional immunity" applied to him, so I use it without really knowing what it means!
In the first month after the murder the police told the media that Mbolombo had been missing for three weeks since the murder. Now we know they arrested him within a few days. Funny stuff going on there. Even Traverso admitted she'd have to go and find out how his immunity applied to her court.
Just posted within the hour, watch this video where an expert says that if the application had been dismissed it couldn't have been appealed, but seeing it was granted the state can appeal. (That's probably why there's a bit of confusion.)
But he says only appealed on a point of law, so I assume not on the merits of the case.
BIG BUT THOUGH - what's the point? There's a man taking a one-way trip on a private jet out of South Africa tomorrow.
Everything about the deal with Mbolombo has been shrouded in secrecy from the beginning, including the conditions of his immunity. But I have read the term "conditional immunity" applied to him, so I use it without really knowing what it means!
In the first month after the murder the police told the media that Mbolombo had been missing for three weeks since the murder. Now we know they arrested him within a few days. Funny stuff going on there. Even Traverso admitted she'd have to go and find out how his immunity applied to her court.
I wish you'd been on the prosecution team. You hopeless and Claire would be the core team uzman in charge of forensic experiments . Mr White do the co-ordination and take charge of the office while Javed booty and I liaise with the family.
The Dewanis’ lavish three-day wedding in Mumbai, India, is estimated to have cost £200,000. Mr Hindocha told Mail Online he agreed to pay two-thirds of the bill and would ask for receipts to be disclosed in court in London to prove how the money was spent. Mr Hindocha told Mail Online he was seeking legal redress for the deception. "The whole wedding was a drama and was false. I am going to sue him for that. Not just for the money, but for the loss of my daughter. Anni left this world just for nothing.”
Everything about the deal with Mbolombo has been shrouded in secrecy from the beginning, including the conditions of his immunity. But I have read the term "conditional immunity" applied to him, so I use it without really knowing what it means!
In the first month after the murder the police told the media that Mbolombo had been missing for three weeks since the murder. Now we know they arrested him within a few days. Funny stuff going on there. Even Traverso admitted she'd have to go and find out how his immunity applied to her court.
Whilst it would've been interesting to hear Shrien's version of events, I think this was the right decision. He didn't do it. Whilst I understand why Anni's family wanted to hear Shrien speak, it seems to me that the rightful anger they have for him sleeping with prostitutes on the side has clouded their judgement and they just want him to pay for her death, whether he ordered it or not. I hope the guy with the immunity goes on trial and they eventually come to realise the truth.
You do realise that today's dismissal of the case doesn't mean that Dewani didn't order and pay for the hit?
The legal decision and whether or not he did it are unconnected. Today's verdict was purely about the perceived quality of the state's evidence. The truth hasn't been legally tested.
Comments
Thanks.
Were there conflicting views reported in the media/news by other legel heads do you know?
And if there were, any chance of any links. Don't worry if it's a lot of trouble.
I did search myself and couldn't find any.
Not this one.
And of course we'd be up against Elbraddo for the defence, assisted by Jeeeezzz.
Bib: Did the Judge say that?
Elbraddo gets thrown out and replaced by idlewide
I was thinking that I would want e as the defence lead but actually I do want high competence on both sided
I love this group!
Couple of things. The Hindochas have gone on record saying that the Bombay wedding was not legal and Anni was not legally married. In this case, how can they bring a case against SD? I suppose it was a verbal marriage contract - is that enforceable.
In any case, when one enters into marriage, can one not lie about ones sexual past? I can understand bringing a case if lies about sexual behaviour causes bodily harm (i.e. someone infects a partner with an STD or HIV) but apart from that surely a court is not going to rule on something like this. At least I hope not.
Just posted within the hour, watch this video where an expert says that if the application had been dismissed it couldn't have been appealed, but seeing it was granted the state can appeal. (That's probably why there's a bit of confusion.)
But he says only appealed on a point of law, so I assume not on the merits of the case.
BIG BUT THOUGH - what's the point? There's a man taking a one-way trip on a private jet out of South Africa tomorrow.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-29914835
One should be able to lie about one's sexual past but not if doing so you obtain money by deception.
I agree with you.
It's not generally illegal to lie and cheat in relationships. Not under Western legal systems anyway, Sharia law is another story.
Oh sorry. You seem to know far more than I about the family, and how their paying for the marriage was stipulated exactly.
Everything about the deal with Mbolombo has been shrouded in secrecy from the beginning, including the conditions of his immunity. But I have read the term "conditional immunity" applied to him, so I use it without really knowing what it means!
In the first month after the murder the police told the media that Mbolombo had been missing for three weeks since the murder. Now we know they arrested him within a few days. Funny stuff going on there. Even Traverso admitted she'd have to go and find out how his immunity applied to her court.
Thanks AB.
Nothing about this case is straightforward.
You do make me smile neelia.
Thanks for that. I must ponder it later.
You do realise that today's dismissal of the case doesn't mean that Dewani didn't order and pay for the hit?
The legal decision and whether or not he did it are unconnected. Today's verdict was purely about the perceived quality of the state's evidence. The truth hasn't been legally tested.