Shrien Dewani trial

[WhoDaresWins]

I can't see a thread on this and I think it's going to be similar to the Pistorius trial in that the evidence is circumstantial and either version could easily be the truth.

One of the convicted killers has been giving evidence this morning and has given a fairly straightforward version of events thus far.

I also read Dewani's statement which throws up lots of questions.

Early thoughts?

what makes no sense is that the murderers let him go - life is cheap in SA and they'd surely have killed him too to avoid being identified.

I read something about how the killers allegedly planned a kidnap/ransom, which would explain letting him go - so he could pay the ransom.

I also read that the killers (who all got reduced sentences for implicating Dewani) said that Dewani made phone calls at particular times to make arrangements - but there was no evidence of these calls taking place.

On balance, I believe he's not guilty.

I don't really know what I think. I did think he was guilty. The mental breakdown looked like a plot when he thought he'd get sent back to sa. But now I'm not sure. Whatever happened, we will never know.
He must have had so much pressure from family wanting him to marry when he was gay. All very sad.

Having followed the case, I am absolutely convinced that he is not guilty and I think the judgement today was the correct one.

I'm unaware of any evidence at all, and as it was reckoned that !rs Dewani was killed accidentally, I have no difficulty with him being allowed to live.

I think he is guilty (just a hunch) but it is really very difficult to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt and therefore by default an awful lot of guilty people escape formal justice for their crimes.

Is he gay or bi?

Because if he's bi then why couldn't he of married her and loved her? He would like females too so not an issue. Don't think he's guilty though

I think people are scared to discuss the gay or bisexuality issue for fear of being seen as homophobic.

It is such a massive coincidence that a newly-wed in a clearly sham marriage was caught up in this otherwise inexplicable murder. That's what gives me the hunch that he is guilty, but then a hunch is just a hunch and not good enough to convict anyone on.

I don't know what to think really. Mostly, I feel sorry for Anni's family, because if Shrien Dewani had testified, at least they would have a bit more to go on, the chance to hear his side of the story, even the possibility of believing him and having some kind of closure.

I suspect the is just gay. He couldn't deny his homosexuality because there was too much evidence but he couldn't admit to being out and out gay as that would look too dodgy for him...

I feel hugely sorry for Anni's family. There has been no explanation for what happened to her. They must feel desperate.

I suspect he is just gay

Even if that was true and all his relationships with women were shams it does not provide a motive for murder.

There has been no explanation for what happened to her

I'm sorry but there has and this murder is not, as you describe it, inexplicable.

She was in a taxi that was carjacked by two robbers who had arranged the whole thing with the taxi driver. On the evidence available it seems the robbers simply intended to take the Dewani's possessions, not murder them. Shrien was thrown out of the car. Anni was shot accidentally in a struggle, possibly over some of her possessions. The killers then implicated Dewani in return for reduced sentences, the bulk of the evidence coming from Tongo who was the only one who had been in direct contact with Dewani.

Tongo wants you to believe that Dewani walked out of an airport, took the first available taxi then, having known the driver for less than half an hour, asked him to organise his wife's murder. You seem willing to accept that scenario. I agree with the judge that this simply isn't credible.

The police bungled this case completely. They falsified an affidavit, statements went unsigned, notebooks went missing, physical evidence was not collected properly and the ballistics investigation was flawed.

Agree with PRH.

Isn't there footage of the taxi entering and leaving his hotel room though? Why would that be the case if they'd only known each other half an hour?

There's footage of a jo'burg taxi driver coming to DH's holiday apartment somewhere to discuss details of a tour we were taking.

And if you are a driver in league with thieves, wouldn't you try and build rapport with your target and check out his environment for evidence of wealth?

I agree with Phr. I feel so sorry for her family, but I suspect if he had taken the stand he would have denied murdering her and then they still would not accept it- they basically do not want to believe anything other than that he is guilty.

If he is not guilty, and that evidence, or lack of, seems to back that up- then why would he 'want' to give his evidence and go through a traumatic cross-examination? People who say that he should have gone through that so that the family could have closure are not being realistic. He is on trial for murder, it is not a game. I think most people in his situation would try and get the trial thrown out if they could, and not just bravely carry on because they feel they have nothing to hide. Sad for her family but there have been three convictions for their daughters death, to say they have not got justice is not true. Justice does not mean putting someone on trial just because you think they might have done it. There has to be evidence and there just wasn't enough in this case.

I feel sad that there was a marriage at all. Why is it still such a stigma to be gay? From what we are seeing on the news there was little communication between them and when there was she was clearly stating her doubts. Its just tragic.

prh and miss Penelope . You have both said exactly what I feel

I cannot understand how anyone can think he got away with murder and I feel so sorry for him

The Hindochas are suffering but it won't have been plain sailing for the dewanis either

I've changed my mind over Dewani. It must have been a car jacking that went very wrong. Shrien would have been released from the car so that he could get the ransom money.

Tongo wants you to believe that Dewani walked out of an airport, took the first available taxi then, having known the driver for less than half an hour, asked him to organise his wife's murder. You seem willing to accept that scenario. I agree with the judge that this simply isn't credible.

I agree with this.

I also think, based on what I've read, that Shrien was under huge pressure from his family to get married. It doesn't sound to me like he's bisexual - he's never had anything like a successful relationship with a woman - all have been abject failures and all the evidence is of him frequenting gay clubs etc. I strongly suspect that he's a gay man from an ultra-conservative family who basically had to get married for his family's honour. Very sad for him and for Anni, who got duped by him/his family into believing he was heterosexual.

As to her murder - it sounds like a car-jacking gone horribly wrong. Two people who didn't know the country, had only just arrived, stumbling into a very dangerous place to be at night.

I heard someone on the radio saying that he must have planned it because he took her to a really dangerous part of the world.

Silly assumption to make as it assumes she had no say whatsoever about their honeymoon destination.

New York is very dangerous but look who is visiting there at the moment - only the second in line to the throne!

NY dangerous? Why?

i thought NY was one of the safest city's to visit now,i read somewhere over the years the crime rate has drastically plummeted due to tough measures by the police/mayor etc

prepared to be corrected though

It is much safer than it was (and safer than South Africa) but I wouldn't go so far as to call it one of the safest cities in the world. The murder rate in New York is over double that of London. Despite steady falls over the last 20 years or so the murder rate in the USA is still substantially worse than any other well off, democratic country. But this is getting rather off topic!

I imagine NYC is much safer than some parts of South Africa. You can walk everywhere for one.

I'm South African (lived there for first 27 years of my life) and I have studied criminal law in both SA and the UK - this by no means makes me an expert but I don't understand why the case was thrown out. Yes the defendant must be presumed innocent until guilt is proven without doubt but how can this be done without a trial. I think there is loads of evidence to point to the fact that Shrien Dewani could be guilty.

To those of you saying the modus operandi seems weird - it is actually very common in SA for people to pay for a hit on someone and try to hide it by making it look like a typical hijacking or house breaking. There are many high profile cases of this happening including the Kebble case and a case of a woman killing her boyfriend's toddler daughter in a supposed home robbery. The media reported that he has a South African family friend who was accused of getting her husband killed in a fake hijacking.

My gut tells me he did this. I've never heard of a woman being shot and the man going free usually if someone is shot both are shot or the man would be shot and the woman raped and dumped somewhere. I think that if one of the accomplices had not died of a brain tumor (which in itself could be suspicious) then the trial might've gone ahead. It's all incredibly unsettling and doesn't add up in my mind.

New York is actually very safe whereas Cape Town has one of the highest murder rates of any city on earth. There is no comparison at all between the two cities. One is a first world city with dangerous parts, which tourists would hardly ever go to, while in Cape Town the crime pervades all areas and all aspects of life. SA has about a 6 times higher homicide rate than the USA.