If people are interestesd in the facts and the evidence, it is all in these documents. Every last word spoken by every single witness. - it's all there.
You can examine and test the logic for yourselves.
There is AMPLE evidence to show that the 3 liars concocted a made up fairytale, implicating Dewani. That fairytale is the entire genesis of the State case and ANY accusation that Dewani had anything to do with the crime, simply cannot have any basis if that fairytale is proved to be untrue.
Don't worry about debating it on a forum. Debate it in your own minds and if you genuinely believed SD to be guilty, then accept the fact that you were deceived by the 3 liars.
Good question. It doesn't look like the 174 submissions had much effect on the "guilters" mindset, despite the overwhelming evidence that the "hit" story was made up. They still believe SD's guilty.
"overwhelming evidence" - well then MM must be convicted of framing SD. I doubt, that that will happen.
I also find it fascinating and a bit of an indictment on society, that people feel that they should punish someone based on gut feelings, based on suspicion, based on "his explanation doesn't make sense to me", based on the fact that he led a gay double life, based on the fact that, in their estimation, SD didn't love Anni.
Those quotes are simply wrong for a lot of posters here.
There is a little more than that.
I've gotten quite a few private messages from people who look at these forums, and a lot of them expressed shock at the prevailing "guilty" viewpoint, despite the evidence pointing in completely the other direction.
So what.
And where is the evidence, that proves a framing? If you have the onus to prove brd, it will change your position drastically.
A number of these messages expressed dismay at the thought that these people might sit on actual juries and cast judgment on their peers.
I already answered, that I would have voted "not guilty". But also I am still sure that SD was involved.
I guess, that there are people out there, who have the capability to distinguish.
Btw I don't like courts, where only juries decide.
It's quite frightening to think that one day, if one of us found ourselves in a position where we were implicated in a crime that we didn't commit, we could face such horrible bias and judgment by our peers on issues that are totally unrelated and irrelevant to the actual allegations and the facts of the case.
Scary.
Let's assume SD is indeed innocent.
Then the bias of some/ a lot/ whatever how many is also partly SD's fault. He (his lawyers) decided to stay mute for 4 years and to fight against standing a trial.
If the defence sees Tongo as organising a murder when he had a clean record as being improbable, then they must also concede that Tongo organising a carjacking when he had no criminal history as improbable. It cannot be one rule for and not the other.
But we know for a fact that he did one or the other.
The question is which one do you find more improbable.
Good question. It doesn't look like the 174 submissions had much effect on the "guilters" mindset, despite the overwhelming evidence that the "hit" story was made up. They still believe SD's guilty.
I also find it fascinating and a bit of an indictment on society, that people feel that they should punish someone based on gut feelings, based on suspicion, based on "his explanation doesn't make sense to me", based on the fact that he led a gay double life, based on the fact that, in their estimation, SD didn't love Anni.
I asked a question earlier and got shot down for it because I asked whether homophobia or "man hating" plays a part. It was a genuine question.
Iook at the ethnicity of the majority of fb posters then reword the question
"overwhelming evidence" - well then MM must be convicted of framing SD. I doubt, that that will happen.
.....
And where is the evidence, that proves a framing? If you have the onus to prove brd, it will change your position drastically.
.......
I already answered, that I would have voted "not guilty". But also I am still sure that SD was involved.
I too hope MM is bought to full justice for his perjury, and that Tongo and Qwabe are also punished for perjury and framing Dewani.
All the evidence is in the Heads of Arguments I posted a few posts before this one. ALL the evidence is right there. It is crystal clear that the 3 liars tailored their story as they went along, changing it to try to align it with the evidence (like the CCTV footage for example), but ultimately they couldn't do even close to a good enough job. None of what trhey said tallied up with the other conspirators, and none of what they said tallied up with call/text records.
Honestly, My White. The evidence and the logic is all there in the Defence Heads. You just need to read it, and be open minded to the fact that Dewani was framed.
On your 3rd point. Great. I believe you. You're a good guy.
But we know for a fact that he did one or the other.
The question is which one do you find more improbable.
That's my point, if he must have been capable of one, then he must also have been capable of the other. The defence were trying to say it was improbable he would have organised a carjacking with no record, it then follows the same is true of a genuine carjacking. If he is capable of one, he must also be capable of the other.
Let's assume SD is indeed innocent.
Then the bias of some/ a lot/ whatever how many is also partly SD's fault. He (his lawyers) decided to stay mute for 4 years and to fight against standing a trial.
This point warrants attention. it's a good one.
Lets assume SD is innocent. Lets assume Tongo and Co got caught and faced their charges like any other criminal. Left SD out of it. Didn't make up the fairy story. Faced charges of robbery, kidnapping, murder.
So SD would have gone back to the UK. What might he have done once he was back in the UK?
Well he might have:
- given telephone or skype police statements/interviews, filling in all the details about the helicopter and money, and given his reasons why he had ommitted that info from the original statements
- told the full story to the Hindocha family in private
- told the full styory to his own family in private
- made himself available to answer any and all questions that SA police had, about the night in question.
- done everything possible to assist police and put his wife's killers behind bars
Instead:
He was accused of a crime he didn't commit (remember we're assuming he's innocent here), so he had to hire lawyers. And lawyers advised him to shut up and say nothing until trial. Exercised his right to silence. Unfortunately his family also hired PR firms as they thought it might be a good way to cope with negative publicity and slander to someone who is being accused of a crime he didn't commit (remember - we're assuming innocence here). and that created a huge mess
Then we had the gay double life stuff come out, and obviously, like any other man with such secrets, he tried desperately to deny them, and lie about them to stop them coming out. But to no avail.
So yes, SD played some role in the mess that was created, but the SA police charging him with a crime he didn't commit, played a far greater role. Were it not for that, he would have ben free to talk, everyone would've gotten the answers they wanted. He already showed that he wasn't shy of doing interviews, so he most definitely would've given his side of the story much earlier, were it not for him being falsely accused of being complicit in the murder.
I already answered, that I would have voted "not guilty". But also I am still sure that SD was involved. I guess, that there are people out there, who have the capability to distinguish.
Btw I don't like courts, where only juries decide.
.
It would appear that there are a few who haven't. I wouldn't have considered it that hard a concept to grasp. Apart from the nicety of the Criminal Justice System re beyond reasonable doubt, there is also the onus on jury members to scrutinise all the evidence presented (not dipping in and out and focusing on aspects that catch your eye as well as ignore what has not been presented (if not the ideal situation to be unaware of it)
All the evidence is in the Heads of Arguments I posted a few posts before this one. ALL the evidence is right there. It is crystal clear that the 3 liars tailored their story as they went along, changing it to try to align it with the evidence (like the CCTV footage for example), but ultimately they couldn't do even close to a good enough job. None of what trhey said tallied up with the other conspirators, and none of what they said tallied up with call/text records.
Honestly, My White. The evidence and the logic is all there in the Defence Heads. You just need to read it, and be open minded to the fact that Dewani was framed.
Not enough to convict.
SD's defense is absurd naivety.
MM's and the others' would be preposterous stupidity and weak memory.
Where is the evidence? Where is a note or a witness, telling that a framing was planned?
Quote it.
Not enough to convict.
SD's defense is absurd naivety.
MM's and the others' would be preposterous stupidity and weak memory.
Where is the evidence? Where is a note or a witness, telling that a framing was planned?
Quote it.
I don't follow your logic. The evidence clearly proves that ZT, MM and MQ told completely different stories, the only commonality being that SD asked them to murder his wife.
If they are deemed to be lying and making the story up, then that in itself is the evidence that they were framing Dewani.
I don't have to show you the word "framing" surely? It doesn't appear in those documents. But that's what it means when one person tries to falsely implicate someone else as being complicit in a crime.
There are no two ways about this. If Tongo and Co are lying, then that = framing Dewani.
Signed by Shrien Dewani in Cape Town on October 3rd 2014
In light of the above, what do you make of paragraph 159 of the state's final heads of argument? It reads:
"Tongo conceded that the accused did not send him a text message while driving to Somerset West or from Somerset West regarding the money which was in an envelope in a pouch".
All the reasoning has been explained clearly over the course of this long thread, you only have to go back and read it with your eyes open to see that's it's nit because of 'a gut feeling'. There is no smoking gun in this case but neither is there even one text or conversation about the purpose if the 100k, which would exonerate him completely.
I've been reading the whole thread, and most of the stuff spouted here is drivel.
All that can be plausibly explained by one thing; SD naively trusting Tongo, who did a bang-up conjob in gaining SD's trust and marketing himself as a driver/tour guide who would make their trip unforgettable.
Unfortunately, he delivered.
And what you're forgetting is that there is hugely compelling evidence that the 3 liars concocted their story. It's a fairy tale. There isn't one ounce of truth to it. Nada. Zip.
I am forgetting nothing. I have already stated that the word of three criminal witnesses on a plea bargain is not to be trusted.
I think elbraddo that you are so desperate for whatever reason to see SD walk free, you are no longer reading posts.
I agreed SD should on the evidence so far, walk free. I do though believe he is guilty.
I don't follow your logic. The evidence clearly proves that ZT, MM and MQ told completely different stories, the only commonality being that SD asked them to murder his wife.
If they are deemed to be lying and making the story up, then that in itself is the evidence that they were framing Dewani.
I don't have to show you the word "framing" surely? It doesn't appear in those documents. But that's what it means when one person tries to falsely implicate someone else as being complicit in a crime.
Not enough to convict for the whole thing. Maybe some were lying partly, maybe some were mistaken partly.
So Mr White, can I ask you this: if Cape Town's second most senior Judge - who has sat through the entire case and seen all the evidence - makes a finding that Tongo and Co were lying and that no evidence whatsoever could be found to supports the "hit" story - would you then concede that Tongo and co framed Dewani?
Or would you maintain that the Judge had got it all wrong.
I get obsessed with these things! I only became interested in this case about 3-4 weeks ago. Up until then I had assumed he was a lying creep who'd been caught on camera soliciting a hit on his wife, and I imagined he'd be found guilty since they'd gone to all the trouble to extradite him.
If tongo et al are proven liars then you cant really believe a word they say. Which means both the state and the defence cases are founded on pure conjecture. The evidence is ultimately so weak that neither argument holds any water and becomes and incoherent he said she said mess.
What evidence is there?
Evidence tongo picked them up at the airport
evidence tongo met with sd for half hour at the hotel. Could have been discussing anything
evidence of different contact between sd and tongo - dont know whats said
evidence of sd asking about exchange rates and exchanging cash
evidence for him forgetting his phone and returning
evidence of tongo chatting to mbolombo arranging something (interpretation)
evidence of mbolombo talking to killers
Evidence tongo texted killer
evidence of internet search by sd for winery
evidence they went to multiple restaurants
Evidence mngeni and qwabe entered the car
evidence tongo left
evidence sd got out (somehow)
Evidence anni was shot by someone (we dont even know that)
Evidence a ring was placed in the seat stitching (by whom?)
evidence she was grabbed (who by we dont know)
Evidence of meeting with tongo and sd
evidence sd gave tongo something
evidence of money and thankyou cards given by sd.
That's my point, if he must have been capable of one, then he must also have been capable of the other. The defence were trying to say it was improbable he would have organised a carjacking with no record, it then follows the same is true of a genuine carjacking. If he is capable of one, he must also be capable of the other.
Yes, and if all the actual evidence points to one, and none of the evidence points to the other, then its pretty clear which one was Tongo's chosen course of action. Isn't it?
I get the feeling that even, after serving his time, Tongo were to admit SD was innocent, there will be people accusing him of being paid off by the Dewani family.
That's my point, if he must have been capable of one, then he must also have been capable of the other. The defence were trying to say it was improbable he would have organised a carjacking with no record, it then follows the same is true of a genuine carjacking. If he is capable of one, he must also be capable of the other.
I personally think the barriers of entry to a robbery are far lower than those of murder.
The fact that there are many more robberies than murders lends credence to that view.
Yes, I have concluded that it is overwhelming probable he is guilty. As will any intelligent person who looks objectively at the evidence and circumstances as they are known today.
I do realize though that those who either don't understand the evidence and probabilities, or deliberately misrepresent them, are quite capable of coming to some other conclusion.
In light of the above, what do you make of paragraph 159 of the state's final heads of argument? It reads:
"Tongo conceded that the accused did not send him a text message while driving to Somerset West or from Somerset West regarding the money which was in an envelope in a pouch".
While driving to Somerset West is clear, because there was no text message.
While driving from Somerset West is a unclear to me as well, because there was text message conversation between SD and Tongo later on.
SD says he only texted he has the money.
Tongo first says SD texted money in envelope in pouch. Then he seems to contradict himself, but I don't know how.
Comments
State Opposal of application for dismissal - Heads of Argument - https://www.scribd.com/doc/248147307/Final-Heads-of-Argument
If people are interestesd in the facts and the evidence, it is all in these documents. Every last word spoken by every single witness. - it's all there.
You can examine and test the logic for yourselves.
There is AMPLE evidence to show that the 3 liars concocted a made up fairytale, implicating Dewani. That fairytale is the entire genesis of the State case and ANY accusation that Dewani had anything to do with the crime, simply cannot have any basis if that fairytale is proved to be untrue.
Don't worry about debating it on a forum. Debate it in your own minds and if you genuinely believed SD to be guilty, then accept the fact that you were deceived by the 3 liars.
Those quotes are simply wrong for a lot of posters here.
There is a little more than that.
I am not gay, but I neither hate them nor am I afraid of them. I am male. That should answer your question.
So what.
And where is the evidence, that proves a framing? If you have the onus to prove brd, it will change your position drastically.
I already answered, that I would have voted "not guilty". But also I am still sure that SD was involved.
I guess, that there are people out there, who have the capability to distinguish.
Btw I don't like courts, where only juries decide.
Let's assume SD is indeed innocent.
Then the bias of some/ a lot/ whatever how many is also partly SD's fault. He (his lawyers) decided to stay mute for 4 years and to fight against standing a trial.
But we know for a fact that he did one or the other.
The question is which one do you find more improbable.
Iook at the ethnicity of the majority of fb posters then reword the question
I too hope MM is bought to full justice for his perjury, and that Tongo and Qwabe are also punished for perjury and framing Dewani.
All the evidence is in the Heads of Arguments I posted a few posts before this one. ALL the evidence is right there. It is crystal clear that the 3 liars tailored their story as they went along, changing it to try to align it with the evidence (like the CCTV footage for example), but ultimately they couldn't do even close to a good enough job. None of what trhey said tallied up with the other conspirators, and none of what they said tallied up with call/text records.
Honestly, My White. The evidence and the logic is all there in the Defence Heads. You just need to read it, and be open minded to the fact that Dewani was framed.
On your 3rd point. Great. I believe you. You're a good guy.
That's my point, if he must have been capable of one, then he must also have been capable of the other. The defence were trying to say it was improbable he would have organised a carjacking with no record, it then follows the same is true of a genuine carjacking. If he is capable of one, he must also be capable of the other.
This point warrants attention. it's a good one.
Lets assume SD is innocent. Lets assume Tongo and Co got caught and faced their charges like any other criminal. Left SD out of it. Didn't make up the fairy story. Faced charges of robbery, kidnapping, murder.
So SD would have gone back to the UK. What might he have done once he was back in the UK?
Well he might have:
- given telephone or skype police statements/interviews, filling in all the details about the helicopter and money, and given his reasons why he had ommitted that info from the original statements
- told the full story to the Hindocha family in private
- told the full styory to his own family in private
- made himself available to answer any and all questions that SA police had, about the night in question.
- done everything possible to assist police and put his wife's killers behind bars
Instead:
He was accused of a crime he didn't commit (remember we're assuming he's innocent here), so he had to hire lawyers. And lawyers advised him to shut up and say nothing until trial. Exercised his right to silence. Unfortunately his family also hired PR firms as they thought it might be a good way to cope with negative publicity and slander to someone who is being accused of a crime he didn't commit (remember - we're assuming innocence here). and that created a huge mess
Then we had the gay double life stuff come out, and obviously, like any other man with such secrets, he tried desperately to deny them, and lie about them to stop them coming out. But to no avail.
So yes, SD played some role in the mess that was created, but the SA police charging him with a crime he didn't commit, played a far greater role. Were it not for that, he would have ben free to talk, everyone would've gotten the answers they wanted. He already showed that he wasn't shy of doing interviews, so he most definitely would've given his side of the story much earlier, were it not for him being falsely accused of being complicit in the murder.
SD's defense is absurd naivety.
MM's and the others' would be preposterous stupidity and weak memory.
Where is the evidence? Where is a note or a witness, telling that a framing was planned?
Quote it.
I don't follow your logic. The evidence clearly proves that ZT, MM and MQ told completely different stories, the only commonality being that SD asked them to murder his wife.
If they are deemed to be lying and making the story up, then that in itself is the evidence that they were framing Dewani.
I don't have to show you the word "framing" surely? It doesn't appear in those documents. But that's what it means when one person tries to falsely implicate someone else as being complicit in a crime.
There are no two ways about this. If Tongo and Co are lying, then that = framing Dewani.
In light of the above, what do you make of paragraph 159 of the state's final heads of argument? It reads:
"Tongo conceded that the accused did not send him a text message while driving to Somerset West or from Somerset West regarding the money which was in an envelope in a pouch".
I've been reading the whole thread, and most of the stuff spouted here is drivel.
I think elbraddo that you are so desperate for whatever reason to see SD walk free, you are no longer reading posts.
I agreed SD should on the evidence so far, walk free. I do though believe he is guilty.
Why it is so obviously important to you?
Dewani was basically caught lying as well. Doesn't prove that the whole story is wrong. The same for the others.
Or would you maintain that the Judge had got it all wrong.
Because there is zero evidence to suggest that he's guilty. And in 13 days, a Judge will find exactly that.
I get obsessed with these things!
What evidence is there?
Evidence tongo picked them up at the airport
evidence tongo met with sd for half hour at the hotel. Could have been discussing anything
evidence of different contact between sd and tongo - dont know whats said
evidence of sd asking about exchange rates and exchanging cash
evidence for him forgetting his phone and returning
evidence of tongo chatting to mbolombo arranging something (interpretation)
evidence of mbolombo talking to killers
Evidence tongo texted killer
evidence of internet search by sd for winery
evidence they went to multiple restaurants
Evidence mngeni and qwabe entered the car
evidence tongo left
evidence sd got out (somehow)
Evidence anni was shot by someone (we dont even know that)
Evidence a ring was placed in the seat stitching (by whom?)
evidence she was grabbed (who by we dont know)
Evidence of meeting with tongo and sd
evidence sd gave tongo something
evidence of money and thankyou cards given by sd.
There is no "evidence" to prove anything
Yes, and if all the actual evidence points to one, and none of the evidence points to the other, then its pretty clear which one was Tongo's chosen course of action. Isn't it?
I personally think the barriers of entry to a robbery are far lower than those of murder.
The fact that there are many more robberies than murders lends credence to that view.
Yes, I have concluded that it is overwhelming probable he is guilty. As will any intelligent person who looks objectively at the evidence and circumstances as they are known today.
I do realize though that those who either don't understand the evidence and probabilities, or deliberately misrepresent them, are quite capable of coming to some other conclusion.
While driving to Somerset West is clear, because there was no text message.
While driving from Somerset West is a unclear to me as well, because there was text message conversation between SD and Tongo later on.
SD says he only texted he has the money.
Tongo first says SD texted money in envelope in pouch. Then he seems to contradict himself, but I don't know how.
Maybe someone else can clarify.