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?

There was a link in the guardian today to the case in SA where she basically went to a taxi rank and paid complete strangers to murder her partner's baby daughter.

There is much about this case which doesn't add up, but I think it was the right decision today.

Feel so sad for Anni's family.

MetroMonkey

how can this be done without a trial

There was a trial and the judge decided that the prosecution case was not strong enough to convict. The trial was therefore stopped without the defence having to present their case. That happens from time to time, both in South Africa and the UK. If there is no evidence on which the accused can be convicted there is no point wasting everyone's time going through the defence case.

The media reported that he has a South African family friend...

All kinds of allegations have appeared in the press about Dewani. That doesn't make them true. As I understand it the allegation was that Dewani himself had been involved in killing a family friend in South Africa. The murder was staged as a carjacking but nothing was stolen. This allegation has been discredited and did not form part of the case against Dewani. It proves absolutely nothing.

I've never heard of a woman being shot and the man going free

The available forensic evidence suggests Anni Dewani was shot by accident during a struggle. If she had not struggled she may still be alive.

if one of the accomplices had not died of a brain tumor (which in itself could be suspicious)

I fail to see how one of the gunmen dying of a brain tumour is in any way suspicious. It is also unlikely that his death made any difference to the outcome. He did not have any direct contact with Dewani so the only evidence he could give regarding Dewani's alleged involvement would be what Tongo told him. The only member of the gang who had direct contact with Dewani was Tongo, the taxi driver. The judge found his evidence lacked credibility.

prh47bridge - you raise some very good points but you seem to have an initial bias that Dewani is innocent in the same way I felt he was probably guilty.

I understand that he cannot be prosecuted without enough evidence but some would say that just shows how shoddy the police and prosecution has been in this case.

The testimony of the gunman who died of a brain tumor would of course be relevant to the prosecution's case. If Dewani is guilty the gunman would've been under instructions about who and who not to kill and would be privy to other information about the whole deal. On the other hand of Dewani is innocent, the same man would potentially have been exposed as a liar or had inconsistencies in his testimony.

If he is innocent I feel incredibly sorry for him to have to have gone through this whole ordeal. It is nasty for all involved.

I approached this case with no bias. However, having seen the evidence, I do not believe Dewani is guilty. Tongo's story lacks credibility and is inconsistent with CCTV evidence. Similarly the evidence of Mbolombo (the alleged go-between) is inconsistent with CCTV evidence which is why he admitted in Dewani's trial that his evidence in Mngeni's trial was false.

Regarding Mngeni (the gunman who died of a brain tumour) you seem to be unaware of the fact that he pleaded not guilty and denied any involvement in the murder, being convicted primarily on the evidence of Tongo, Qwame and Mbolombo. I understand he has never given any evidence to implicate Dewani.

I think the biggest issue that links the Pistorius and Dewani cases is the complete lack of subjudice SA has, so that any high profile case has months of lurid speculation in the media. This then leads to a warped public perception of what has actually been proven to have occurred.

With Dewani, I'm also seeing echoes of the Meredith Kercher case. Someone confessed and is in prison for the offence, but the prosecution seem fixated on a more outlandish theory.

I've changed my mind a few times on this and I guess we'll never really know. But I do struggle with a lack of motive - if he really didn't want to get married to her, he didn't have to. It seems they had a turbulent relationship and had already split up and got back together a few times. It just seems outlandish for someone to get married, then decide the only way out was to murder your spouse - and to do so by arranging a honeymoon in South Africa and paying a taxi driver to have her killed. And I can't believe there was a financial motive either - he was clearly a wealthy man.

Rudy Guede never confessed.

Rudy Guede did confess to being there and being involved (though he changed his statement a few times) and his DNA was all over the crime scene and the victim so he would have been a bit stupid to deny being there.

Do you think he's innocent?

I don't really know what to believe in this case either. My gut says he has something to do with it, but I know you can't convict on a gut feeling. The fact that he could have just not gone through with the wedding may be the case, but the pressure on him from his family must have been immense, especially as he is gay. Also, Anni's family pressurised her into marrying him, despite her misgivings, which I think is part of their anger now. My family and background is quite liberal, although also Asian, and some of the completely unsuitable men I was pressurised into marrying on the basis basically that they had a job and had the same cultural background as me was so ridiculous. It bends your mind so much you start to question your logic. It must have been 20 times that for both of them.

Hackmum, I think he did have to get married. He had already broken off one engagement and that had already bought shame to the family. He couldn't break off a second engagement, esp if rumours may have been speculating about him being gay.

So will Tonga & co all be released now, after all they secured a reduced sentence by agreeing to testify against Dewani. That assumed that Dewani was in some way involved.

The judge has now said Dewani was not involved. Surely that renders the Tonga & co sentences invalid?

Good lord, no, I think Guede is guilty. IIRC though, his story is that he had consensual sexual interaction with MK and then the other two killed her whilst he was in the toilet. Which is what I meant by I don't think he had confessed.

I'm sure the shame he's bought on his family is a thousand times more now even if he wasn't involved in her murder.

Yes but if she had just been murdered on their honeymoon and he hadn't had to go through the whole trial thing, he would have been a grieving husband who could not bear to be married to anyone else... and free to do what he liked in private.

Fez, I think that's wrong though - if he had so much family pressure, it would have started again a year or two down the line.

I agree with that. I work with loads of Asians and have many friends. I don't know any of them that are single beyond 30.