Shrien Dewani - Honeymoon murder

[Charlie Wilkes]

Yet there is a case where something like this happened outlined in this thread.

To me, the most extraordinary claim is that there is a police conspiracy. Where is the motive? That police investigators are so concerned about the health of the tourism industry that they will over-complicate a case by including Dewani?

I don't buy this.

I don't allege a police conspiracy. Perhaps the police sincerely think they're right. But where is the proof they are right? I don't see it.

 

[lionking]

I don't allege a police conspiracy. Perhaps the police sincerely think they're right. But where is the proof they are right? I don't see it.

I didn't say you alleged this, but others have.

As for proof, how about a trial determining this? Dewani at least has a case to answer, in my opinion.

 

[lane99]

You get what you pay for

...I believe it was a group of thugs and fools entering into a deal with Dewani without making an itemised list...

If they could have scraped together a single brain amongst the lot of them, the SA contigent would have relieved Dewani and his wife of their valuables, and pulled Dewani aside to offer the following advise:

"Shrien, you and I both know that the real reason you are not going to report this incident to the police is because you will then be mightily at risk that your murderous intentions will be exposed. Not to mention that even if the police don't believe us when we tell them that this was all YOUR idea, the story being out will put a crimp in your ability to come up with a Plan B to have her bumped off later on at another place and time of your choosing.

That will be the REAL reason you don't report this. But you'll need an excuse to give to the lovely Mrs. Dewani. So I'd suggest you tell her the reason you can't report it is because I at this moment am threatening to have my posse kill you and her if you do. So you've decided to cut your losses, thank God you both escaped with your lives, and head back to the safety of England ASAP".

It would have been a lucrative crime, and not only would they likely never have been caught for it, it probably would never even have been reported.

...there was nothing to stop these two murderers from killing Dewani as well. But they didn't. Why not?...

I don't agree with this at all. There were multiple reasons for not killing Dewani in that situation. Amongst the minor reasons is that Dewani still owed them more money.

But the major reason, and the one that gave him ample reason to believe he would be safe, is that Shrien Dewani had a role to play in throwing the cops off the scent. It was an important part of the cover up for Dewani to tell the police that it had been his wife's idea to go slumming around the township.

If Shrien had not been there to tell the police it was all his wife's idea, the heat on the taxi driver would have been considerable. But Shrien's story helped paint the picture of an entirely random incident in which the taxi driver was as much of a victim as Shrien. And that was very helpful.
.
.

 

[Suffolk Skeptic]

I don't agree with this at all. There were multiple reasons for not killing Dewani in that situation. Amongst the minor reasons is that Dewani still owed them more money.

But the major reason, and the one that gave him ample reason to believe he would be safe, is that Shrien Dewani had a role to play in throwing the cops off the scent. It was an important part of the cover up for Dewani to tell the police that it had been his wife's idea to go slumming around the township.

If Shrien had not been there to tell the police it was all his wife's idea, the heat on the taxi driver would have been considerable. But Shrien's story helped paint the picture of an entirely random incident in which the taxi driver was as much of a victim as Shrien. And that was very helpful.
.
.

Hang on, let's not argue amongst ourselves

I was trying to say (obviously not very clearly) that letting Dewani go was even more unlikely in the robbery gone wrong scenario.

But yes you are right. There probably were discussions about what Dewani was going to tell the police because the focus was all going to be on Tongo. By Dewani telling the police that It was Anni's idea and she insisted, Tongo was pretty much in the clear.

I had been concentrating on Dewani saying that in order to make himself look good and avoid any responsibility for what happened.

Looking at the articles again, it seems that the embellishments to make him look like a hero came after he had gotten back to the UK. For instance, he told the
Police in SA the car stopped and he was dragged out of the car by one of the males. When he got back home he started changing it to nonsense about being pushed out of the back window while the car was still moving.

 

[anglolawyer]

I didn't say you alleged this, but others have.

As for proof, how about a trial determining this? Dewani at least has a case to answer, in my opinion.

I allege a police conspiracy. It follows from my belief that Shrien is innocent. If he is innocent there cannot have been an agreed price of R15000 for a hit and in that case there cannot be two people (Qwabe and Tongo) claiming that was the agreed price by chance. There must be something to explain how they both arrived at this mythical number and that something is the SA police.

 

[Octavo]

I allege a police conspiracy. It follows from my belief that Shrien is innocent. If he is innocent there cannot have been an agreed price of R15000 for a hit and in that case there cannot be two people (Qwabe and Tongo) claiming that was the agreed price by chance. There must be something to explain how they both arrived at this mythical number and that something is the SA police.

Hang on. So the cops first let Shrien leave the country because he isn't considered a suspect. Then they arrest the perpetrators, convince them to all lie and implicate Dewani, just so that they can get a grilling in the local media for allowing Dewani to leave before they'd ruled him out?

So they conspire to make themselves look bad? Doesn't make sense.

The cops have absolutely NO motive to implicate Dewani after they let him leave the country, as it makes them look stupid for letting him leave in the first place...

 

[Bob001]

....
b) Tongo was the taxi driver. That does not imply he owned the Taxi. The taxi's being referred to here are what we call mini-buses. Some are owner-driven, but very few. Most of the drivers work for someone who might own several taxi's. They do not make a lot of money.
....

I don't know anything about this case, but even in the U.S. taxi drivers frequently rent their cabs by the shift from the owner. They pay a flat fee plus gas, and keep whatever they make in fares and tips. In some cities a taxi medallion -- the license to operate the taxi -- is a bigger investment than the vehicle itself. So it might be relevant to ask whether the driver lost "his" taxi, or just gave up a rental?

 

[lionking]

I allege a police conspiracy. It follows from my belief that Shrien is innocent. If he is innocent there cannot have been an agreed price of R15000 for a hit and in that case there cannot be two people (Qwabe and Tongo) claiming that was the agreed price by chance. There must be something to explain how they both arrived at this mythical number and that something is the SA police.

What is the motive?

And what is wrong with him presenting his defence in court?

Your incredulity is unconvincing.

 

[anglolawyer]

What is the motive?

What is the motive whenever the cops drive a case towards their own theory? You tell me, but don't tell me it doesn't happen because it features in a lot of miscarriages of justice.

And what is wrong with him presenting his defence in court?

What has this to do with anything I've said? If he were assured of bail I cannot see a good reason for resisting extradition, so long as his health allows him to comprehend the proceedings, which is doubtful at present. If he awaits trial in a SA prison then he is totally screwed from what Ive read.

Your incredulity is unconvincing.

So what? I am not being incredulous in order to convince anybody of anything. I am saying what I don't buy and why I don't.

 

[lionking]

What is the motive whenever the cops drive a case towards their own theory? You tell me

No, you tell me. You're making the claim.

ETA you suggested earlier that it's got something to do with protecting the tourism industry. Are you serious?

 

[Suffolk Skeptic]

I don't know anything about this case, but even in the U.S. taxi drivers frequently rent their cabs by the shift from the owner. They pay a flat fee plus gas, and keep whatever they make in fares and tips. In some cities a taxi medallion -- the license to operate the taxi -- is a bigger investment than the vehicle itself. So it might be relevant to ask whether the driver lost "his" taxi, or just gave up a rental?

As I understand it, he worked as a taxi driver for a company and used their cars.

He also used his own car, a VW Sharan on the side and it was this car which was used on the night of the murder.

 

[anglolawyer]

No, you tell me. You're making the claim.

ETA you suggested earlier that it's got something to do with protecting the tourism industry. Are you serious?

Sure, why not? I honestly don't know why cops do what they do. I just know they do it. I am not interested in educating you on the subject. Read a book.

 

[anglolawyer]

If they could have scraped together a single brain amongst the lot of them, the SA contigent would have relieved Dewani and his wife of their valuables, and pulled Dewani aside to offer the following advise:

"Shrien, you and I both know that the real reason you are not going to report this incident to the police is because you will then be mightily at risk that your murderous intentions will be exposed. Not to mention that even if the police don't believe us when we tell them that this was all YOUR idea, the story being out will put a crimp in your ability to come up with a Plan B to have her bumped off later on at another place and time of your choosing.

That will be the REAL reason you don't report this. But you'll need an excuse to give to the lovely Mrs. Dewani. So I'd suggest you tell her the reason you can't report it is because I at this moment am threatening to have my posse kill you and her if you do. So you've decided to cut your losses, thank God you both escaped with your lives, and head back to the safety of England ASAP".

It would have been a lucrative crime, and not only would they likely never have been caught for it, it probably would never even have been reported.




I don't agree with this at all. There were multiple reasons for not killing Dewani in that situation. Amongst the minor reasons is that Dewani still owed them more money.

But the major reason, and the one that gave him ample reason to believe he would be safe, is that Shrien Dewani had a role to play in throwing the cops off the scent. It was an important part of the cover up for Dewani to tell the police that it had been his wife's idea to go slumming around the township.

If Shrien had not been there to tell the police it was all his wife's idea, the heat on the taxi driver would have been considerable. But Shrien's story helped paint the picture of an entirely random incident in which the taxi driver was as much of a victim as Shrien. And that was very helpful.
.
.

You actually make the pro-innocence case very well here. First you describe what would have been (in fact was) a far better plan than the hypothesised murder, one with higher yield and lower risk. As you say:

It would have been a lucrative crime, and not only would they likely never have been caught for it, it probably would never even have been reported.

and the jewellery would have yielded more without an associated murder to get the police all interested in it.

As for the need to keep Shrien alive just so he could tell the cops it was all her idea to go into the township, is that really such a killer point? What if she had already told her family something different in one of her miserable phone messages? Better to kill both or neither, surely. It's not rocket science. After all, it turned out very suspicious that he survived.

 

[anglolawyer]

Is this to me? I'm not sure I can add to my several posts addressing your points about the jewellery.

Perhaps you would care to tell me just where you are regarding Mgneni's confession? Are you taking heed of it?

If I recall my impression was that it seemed fairly credible and fit well enough with Shrien's account but I could use another look at it TBH.

 

[anglolawyer]

Despite your theory about the deal (assuming innocence) being a split of the jewellery, there is nothing to support this. The robbers didn't take the rings and Tongo didn't get the jewellery. So, the supporting evidence in both scenarios is zero as for whether the jewellery was at any time discussed or made part of the deal.

They didn't take a ring she stuffed down the back seat where it was found. But they did take an Armani wrist watch and a diamond bracelet (among other things). They took her handbag also. They took R90,000 worth of stuff that was no part of the alleged deal at all, allegedly. The reason I suspect the jewellery was not fenced was because there was not supposed to be a murder and the idea of hawking around town distinctive and very hot items suddenly became a lot less attractive than it would have been if they had simply robbed them and waited for them to fly out before cashing in.

The supposed deal about the jewellery is far more important in the robbery gone wrong scenario, yet the happenings of the evening and the next day absolutely contradict it.

What happenings? If robbery was planned but murder was not might this not have altered their plans?

I don't know what Dewani was expecting to happen to all that stuff. I expect he was rather overwhelmed with the plan to dispose of his wife. I don't say he was a cold calculating Blowfeld type, he probably found it all quite scary and exhilarating. As he described it in one of his newspaper interviews within the first few days after the murder, it was "the stuff of movies".

Imagine if, instead of wearing jewellery they each had a transparent bag around their necks stuffed with cash. Do you think it would have occurred neither to Shrien nor to the criminals that this was something of interest to them? I am surprised you think jewellery worth many times as much as the cash supposedly involved played no part in anybody's thinking, especially as some of it was actually stolen.

I believe it was a group of thugs and fools entering into a deal with Dewani without making an itemised list. I don't start from the notion that because it is in SA it is most likely to be a corrupt conspiracy which will depend upon many people lying and fabricating evidence in order to satisfy a political directive from above to hide the already well known crime rate from tourists.

Neither do I.

You point out that there was nothing to stop these two murderers from killing Dewani as well. But they didn't. Why not? There is no sense in dropping them off separately. Apart from the rape thing of course. Which didn't happen. In fact, Dewani said himself that most of the journey was spent with him begging them to drop them together because the robbers had told them they would be dropped off separately. Does this sound at all suspect to you? Drop him off so he can call the police who can then come and find them raping Anni? Really?

The rape thing didn't happen because Anni resisted and the gun went off in her face. Which kind of forced another alteration of plans. It will be interesting to see whether anything more is heard from the witness who supposedly claims she saw Anni's body with knickers down around the ankles and legs in the air. I think there is also a report of fingertip bruising high up on her inner thigh but I I no loner know where I got that from.

Robbery of everything, turned into impromptu rape turned into accidental shooting in the course of rape explains the whole thing.

 

[Octavo]

Robbery of everything, turned into impromptu rape turned into accidental shooting in the course of rape explains the whole thing.

Except of course for the part where the robbers all implicated Dewani.

ETA: or is that the part where the police conspiracy comes in? Occam's Razor anyone?

 

[Suffolk Skeptic]

They didn't take a ring she stuffed down the back seat where it was found. But they did take an Armani wrist watch and a diamond bracelet (among other things). They took her handbag also. They took R90,000 worth of stuff that was no part of the alleged deal at all, allegedly. The reason I suspect the jewellery was not fenced was because there was not supposed to be a murder and the idea of hawking around town distinctive and very hot items suddenly became a lot less attractive than it would have been if they had simply robbed them and waited for them to fly out before cashing in.

But Mgneni tried to sell the watch the next day. You persist in saying that the jewellery was for Tongo but cannot explain either why the rings were not taken or why Mgneni tried to sell the watch.

Imagine if, instead of wearing jewellery they each had a transparent bag around their necks stuffed with cash. Do you think it would have occurred neither to Shrien nor to the criminals that this was something of interest to them? I am surprised you think jewellery worth many times as much as the cash supposedly involved played no part in anybody's thinking, especially as some of it was actually stolen.

Eh? You are the one who says the jewellery played such a big part because you say the plan meant Tongo and the receptionist were to get it. I say it didn't enter into the negotiations because they didn't think about items individually. It was a staged robbery, of course they were going to take goods normally taken in robberies, I should imagine that this is something which wouldn't even need to be said.

If either of them wore clear plastic bags stuffed with cash I expect this would have been discussed in either scenario. Its pretty unusual. In your scenario Tongo would have said to the robbers "make sure you remember to grab the cash, these stupid idiots keep it in plastic bags round their necks". (Although I doubt whether Tongo would have organised a robbery if they were, because it would be almost certain to be traced back to him). In mine he would have said "make sure you remember to grab the cash because its not going to look much like a robbery if we leave something so obvious".

For them to bring in and discuss the jewellery in your scenario they would have had to have some idea of what she would be wearing and how much it was worth. Doesn't that make sense? What if she had decided not to wear any jewellery that night? Would Tongo have called it off?

Logically, the only scenario where the jewellery would have been discussed at the planning stage would have been if Dewani was guilty and he told Tongo what jewellery he would get Anni to wear that night to sweeten the deal.

The rape thing didn't happen because Anni resisted and the gun went off in her face. Which kind of forced another alteration of plans. It will be interesting to see whether anything more is heard from the witness who supposedly claims she saw Anni's body with knickers down around the ankles and legs in the air. I think there is also a report of fingertip bruising high up on her inner thigh but I I no loner know where I got that from.

Robbery of everything, turned into impromptu rape turned into accidental shooting in the course of rape explains the whole thing.

The rape thing didn't happen, we all agree about that. Your favourite villain, Mgneni, who you seem to think is credible in his statement despite him claiming to have been beaten, says that Qwabe stopped the car, opened the back door and was trying to get a small bag off Anni when he shot her. I'm confused about the rape. If they were going to rape her, why did they let Dewani out of the car to raise the alarm? Why didn't they take her somewhere to rape her? Why would one of them get out of the car with the gun and try to get the bag, and then shoot her instead of waiting to take the bag after they had raped her? I mean, with Dewani and the police charging around looking for Anni, they were hardly going to rape her in the back of the car, in turns.

 

[anglolawyer]

Except of course for the part where the robbers all implicated Dewani.

ETA: or is that the part where the police conspiracy comes in? Occam's Razor anyone?

Yes exactly! You are cottoning on at last. A police conspiracy plus generous reductions in sentence for co-operation and a little brutality (as also claimed by some). Or, in the case of Mbolombo, a complete free pass for conspiracy to murder.

 

[lane99]

Except of course for the part where the robbers all implicated Dewani.

ETA: or is that the part where the police conspiracy comes in? Occam's Razor anyone?

Well, not just that. Except for a lot of other things. Many which have already been mentioned here earlier.

One that may not have been is that it wouldn't seem to make much sense that the taxi driver would commit a robbery that it is virtually guaranteed he would be caught for. Everyone knew he was Dewani's driver, so he didn't have anonymity to rely on.

And without Dewani to throw up smoke and mirrors about the slum tourism in the middle of the night being his wife's idea, it would be pretty obvious the taxi driver had lured them into a trap.
,
,

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

Except of course for the part where the robbers all implicated Dewani.

ETA: or is that the part where the police conspiracy comes in? Occam's Razor anyone?

Occam's razor suggests to me that this was ordinary criminal enterprise where something went badly wrong, and the rest is pure fiction. I doubt very much that this wealthy man would knowingly place his own life in the hands of random street criminals in a foreign country.