Shrien Dewani - Honeymoon murder

[Suffolk Skeptic]

Yes, due to political pressure. There's nothing like dead tourists to put other tourists off, and so blaming Dewani for having instigated the whole thing (i.e. to make it not random local violence) was only a marginally less nutty version of blaming the SHarm-el-Sheik shark attacks on Israel.

For there to have been a hit, there should have been some evidence - even circumstantial - that money changed hands, but they had to retro-fit that into the (relatively small) cash that they could show Dewani actually had.

Given that SA has a high and highly reported crime rate and that townships are known to be no go areas the dangers of tourism are already well known. You think that the SA authorities thought it more attractive to fabricate a story that showed that crime is so prevalent and life so cheap that people can hire killers with ease? That doesn't sound preferable to me. That scenario of course would never reduce the prospects of random local violence towards tourists because the morality of the local criminal population would seem to be set at a lower level if men are so easily hired.

 

[Information Analyst]

Given that SA has a high and highly reported crime rate and that townships are known to be no go areas the dangers of tourism are already well known. You think that the SA authorities thought it more attractive to fabricate a story that showed that crime is so prevalent and life so cheap that people can hire killers with ease? That doesn't sound preferable to me. That scenario of course would never reduce the prospects of random local violence towards tourists because the morality of the local criminal population would seem to be set at a lower level if men are so easily hired.

Yes, crime levels are undoubtedly eye-wateringly high in South Africa, yet violence against tourists seems rare. Some of them get robbed, but murder seems very rare. I can certainly recall no case that received even a fraction of the media coverage than this one did, and the coverage was massive. In that context, deflecting the initial blame to Dewani will have been a very attractive proposition.

 

[anglolawyer]

I had a late night and an early morning so I will probably compete with you for brain toffeeness. The transcript of the judgment is here

transcript

Thanks for finding that. I was confusing Mngeni's case at trial (I was not there) with his statement to police, a copy of which it would be nice to have, but it is referenced in paras. 127 and 128.

 

[Suffolk Skeptic]

Yes, crime levels are undoubtedly eye-wateringly high in South Africa, yet violence against tourists seems rare. Some of them get robbed, but murder seems very rare. I can certainly recall no case that received even a fraction of the media coverage than this one did, and the coverage was massive. In that context, deflecting the initial blame to Dewani will have been a very attractive proposition.

The coverage was massive, perhaps because they were a beautiful young couple on their honeymoon?

But still, before the police turned their attention to Dewani the coverage seemed to concentrate on how silly they had been for going onto a township at night, because it was so commonly known that these were no go areas where people were robbed and killed. This was even picked up by Dewani who was so aghast that he might be criticised that he went to such pains to inform the media in the midst of his grief that it was Anni's decision and not his, because she insisted.

If the SA authorities decided to concoct a different story, they were merely saying that in addition to knowing that crime was high and it was commonly known not to go into townships at night, this case also showed that murderers for peanuts were available at your local taxi rank. In addition to that, they must have known that there would be all of these further allegations made that the proceedings against Dewani would bring put all sorts of conspiracy theories and allegations of corruption against not merely the police but the prosecution authorities as well.

Far better for them to go with the easier option and say they had caught a crime ring, reducing the chance of further attacks.

 

[Rogue Trooper]

Yes, crime levels are undoubtedly eye-wateringly high in South Africa, yet violence against tourists seems rare. Some of them get robbed, but murder seems very rare. I can certainly recall no case that received even a fraction of the media coverage than this one did, and the coverage was massive. In that context, deflecting the initial blame to Dewani will have been a very attractive proposition.

Standard police procedure around the globe when a tourist has been murdered in their country is to throw numbers at the case and show that they are doing everything to resolve the crime and that usually involves shaking down the local hoodlums. Blaming the survivor seems way out of kilter with this.

 

[lane99]

By the book

...That doesn't sound preferable to me. That scenario of course would never reduce the prospects of random local violence towards tourists because the morality of the local criminal population would seem to be set at a lower level if men are so easily hired.

Precisely. Chapter Two in Dewani's PR Playbook is the gambit that SA authorities are framing him to avoid damage to the tourism trade.

Dewani can afford the best excuses that money can buy. That he can't come up with anything better than that does not bode well for him. For not only is there is no evidence to support it, there's no plausible motive for it to have occurred.

Dewani's own alibi provides more than sufficient cover for South Africa's reputation were that the police's only concern. Just about anywhere in the world one goes you're liable to get yourself robbed and/or killed if you go slumming in the middle of the night. More so if you go with strangers. Even more so if you go dressed in fancy designer clothes, expensive jewellry, and packing large wads of cash.
.
.

 

[anglolawyer]

Precisely. Chapter Two in Dewani's PR Playbook is the gambit that SA authorities are framing him to avoid damage to the tourism trade.

Dewani can afford the best excuses that money can buy. That he can't come up with anything better than that does not bode well for him. For not only is there is no evidence to support it, there's no plausible motive for it to have occurred.

Dewani's own alibi provides more than sufficient cover for South Africa's reputation were that the police's only concern. Just about anywhere in the world one goes you're liable to get yourself robbed and/or killed if you go slumming in the middle of the night. More so if you go with strangers. Even more so if you go dressed in fancy designer clothes, expensive jewellry, and packing large wads of cash.
.
.

Not sure you mean 'alibi'. His defence to conspiracy to murder is not that he was somewhere else. Good to see you noticing the jewellery. Any chance you or any other pro-guilt person would actually deal with what was supposed to happen to it?

 

[lane99]

There's nothing to deal with. The jewelry is a non-issue. It didn't need to come up in the arrangements for the murder. Those negotiations also did not comport with Incoterms, ISO9001, and no written document was produced, let alone signed and notarized. Apparently this elicits skepticism in some that any negotiation at all therefore existed. And so be it. It takes all kinds.

Meanwhile, Dewani was hardly in a position to tell his wife to leave her jewelery off because they were going to be venturing into a war zone where armed robbery and murder were nightly on the menu.

For at that point, she may just have demurred, and suggest they eat dinner at one of the trendier restaurants she preferred, rather than the run down, out of the way, hole in the wall Shrien otherwise needed to drag her to that night.
.
.

 

[Suffolk Skeptic]

Not sure you mean 'alibi'. His defence to conspiracy to murder is not that he was somewhere else. Good to see you noticing the jewellery. Any chance you or any other pro-guilt person would actually deal with what was supposed to happen to it?

Not sure what you mean. In the Dewani is guilty scenario (preferred by myself) the jewellery is part of the spoils of the robbery along with phones cash etc. Just because Tongo has an acquaintance who is a jeweller doesn't mean Tongo has an expert's eye and can spot a 25k ring from a thousand paces. As Lane says, these negotiations were clearly not drawn up in triplicate with every item to be plundered accounted for.

It is only in your scenario that the jewellery takes on such significance. Here, Tongo is paid nothing, so the jewellery is all important because apparently it is to be split between Tongo and the receptionist. Therefore, Tongo must have an expert's eye because surely he would not arrange the job without securing the prize. The prize he is most likely to have seen in previous encounters with Anni are the rings. But they do not get the rings. And Mgneni tries to sell the watch himself the next day. How exactly does this fit into the theory?

 

[anglolawyer]

There's nothing to deal with. The jewelry is a non-issue. It didn't need to come up in the arrangements for the murder. Those negotiations also did not comport with Incoterms, ISO9001, and no written document was produced, let alone signed and notarized. Apparently this elicits skepticism in some that any negotiation at all therefore existed. And so be it. It takes all kinds.

Meanwhile, Dewani was hardly in a position to tell his wife to leave her jewelery off because they were going to be venturing into a war zone where armed robbery and murder were nightly on the menu.

For at that point, she may just have demurred, and suggest they eat dinner at one of the trendier restaurants she preferred, rather than the run down, out of the way, hole in the wall Shrien otherwise needed to drag her to that night.
.
.

Not sure what you mean. In the Dewani is guilty scenario (preferred by myself) the jewellery is part of the spoils of the robbery along with phones cash etc. Just because Tongo has an acquaintance who is a jeweller doesn't mean Tongo has an expert's eye and can spot a 25k ring from a thousand paces. As Lane says, these negotiations were clearly not drawn up in triplicate with every item to be plundered accounted for.

It is only in your scenario that the jewellery takes on such significance. Here, Tongo is paid nothing, so the jewellery is all important because apparently it is to be split between Tongo and the receptionist. Therefore, Tongo must have an expert's eye because surely he would not arrange the job without securing the prize. The prize he is most likely to have seen in previous encounters with Anni are the rings. But they do not get the rings. And Mgneni tries to sell the watch himself the next day. How exactly does this fit into the theory?

You guys are driving me nuts. How can the fact nothing was arranged about the jewellery not mean something? Nothing was arranged either about paying Mbolombo or Tongo. I re-read Tongo's story - the deal was R15000. That's what Qwabe said too - R15000 for him and his partner, therefore nothing for the other two.

OK so you believe Mbolombo did it for nothing and Tongo did it for minus nothing (one taxi, his livelihood, turned into a crime scene). Really? You really believe that?

So the jewellery etc is worth R90,000 (the stuff taken) and R250,000 (the ring she hid). R340,000 altogether. That is more than 20 times the contract price. Please explain what you think Shrien was expecting to happen to all that stuff when he embarked on the fatal taxi trip? It's not a question of drawing things up in triplicate but just recognising that two paid murderers you have never met before, drawn from a sprawling slum, might not be the most reliable and predictable business partners. I mean what was to stop them killing him too, or just declining to kill her and taking all their ****.

Anyhow, I can see I am beating my head against a brick wall. Neither of you sees the absurdity piled on absurdity of what the SA police have constructed. Presumably you also buy the story that Tongo showed up to collect the balancing payment of R1000 and that Shrien paid it despite being 90 grand down on stolen stuff that was no part of the deal.

You really can't see this makes no sense? Really? Try this: what will Tongo say in cross examination when he's asked his end of the deal? R5000 you'll say. Alright:

1 when was it agreed?
2 when was it paid?

What's he going to say then?

Same for Mbololmbo.

ETA SS, the jewellery cannot be part of the spoils. That's not what any of them says. Why on earth would they lie about that if it were true?

 

[Rogue Trooper]

You guys are driving me nuts. How can the fact nothing was arranged about the jewellery not mean something? Nothing was arranged either about paying Mbolombo or Tongo. I re-read Tongo's story - the deal was R15000. That's what Qwabe said too - R15000 for him and his partner, therefore nothing for the other two.

OK so you believe Mbolombo did it for nothing and Tongo did it for minus nothing (one taxi, his livelihood, turned into a crime scene). Really? You really believe that?

So the jewellery etc is worth R90,000 (the stuff taken) and R250,000 (the ring she hid). R340,000 altogether. That is more than 20 times the contract price. Please explain what you think Shrien was expecting to happen to all that stuff when he embarked on the fatal taxi trip? It's not a question of drawing things up in triplicate but just recognising that two paid murderers you have never met before, drawn from a sprawling slum, might not be the most reliable and predictable business partners. I mean what was to stop them killing him too, or just declining to kill her and taking all their ****.

Anyhow, I can see I am beating my head against a brick wall. Neither of you sees the absurdity piled on absurdity of what the SA police have constructed. Presumably you also buy the story that Tongo showed up to collect the balancing payment of R1000 and that Shrien paid it despite being 90 grand down on stolen stuff that was no part of the deal.

You really can't see this makes no sense? Really? Try this: what will Tongo say in cross examination when he's asked his end of the deal? R5000 you'll say. Alright:

1 when was it agreed?
2 when was it paid?

What's he going to say then?

Same for Mbololmbo.

Insurance covers items of jewellery. Also bandying about values of jewellery and inferring that that amount might be the value you could fence them for on the black market is just bad maths.

 

[anglolawyer]

Insurance covers items of jewellery. Also bandying about values of jewellery and inferring that that amount might be the value you could fence them for on the black market is just bad maths.

I am aware of that. How much do you think the value of the jewellery would be affected with the owners:

1 alive
2 dead?

The same, or different?

I would be interested to know the premiums payable to insure jewellery worn in Cape Town. Standard advice to tourists is not to do so. Insurance companies are pretty much on the ball with these things. So much so I would not be surprised if it were either impossible or prohibitively expensive to insure against the risk they took.

And you did not try to answer my hypothetical questions. They aren't answerable so don't bother. There is a reason why not.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

This guy touches down in a foreign country and immediately contracts with a stranger to commit a murder. He arranges a plot that will involve criminal accomplices he has never met, knowing he will be as vulnerable as the intended target.

This is truly an extraordinary claim. The evidence, as far as I know, consists of the following:

- the statements of criminals
- unexplained phone calls and cash transactions
- inferences based on character and demeanor

It's possible, I suppose. I would need much more evidence.

I have little doubt, however, that if he is extradited, he will be convicted. He offered to tell his story if South African police traveled to the UK to interview him. They declined. That tells me what their intent is.

 

[Information Analyst]

OK so you believe Mbolombo did it for nothing and Tongo did it for minus nothing (one taxi, his livelihood, turned into a crime scene). Really? You really believe that?

I think this is one of the largest elephants in the room in this case. Given that Tongo owed the taxi, even if we accept that he was prepared to be an accessory to murder for so little money in the first place, actually having it committed in the vehicle was guaranteed to deprive him of it - and therefore all his regular and irregular income - for some considerable time. It just doesn't add up.

 

[anglolawyer]

I think this is one of the largest elephants in the room in this case. Given that Tongo owed the taxi, even if we accept that he was prepared to be an accessory to murder for so little money in the first place, actually having it committed in the vehicle was guaranteed to deprive him of it - and therefore all his regular and irregular income - for some considerable time. It just doesn't add up.

No, and I wish the party opposite would man up and answer the difficult questions. Why is the jewellery not in their story? For one thing, it becomes a lot more complicated. Try to construct it. Somebody from the guilt side first please. Tell us what the plan was, or might have been. I bet you can't come up with anything remotely plausible that also explains why Tongo and Mbolombo are silent about it.

 

[Suffolk Skeptic]

You guys are driving me nuts. How can the fact nothing was arranged about the jewellery not mean something? Nothing was arranged either about paying Mbolombo or Tongo. I re-read Tongo's story - the deal was R15000. That's what Qwabe said too - R15000 for him and his partner, therefore nothing for the other two.

OK so you believe Mbolombo did it for nothing and Tongo did it for minus nothing (one taxi, his livelihood, turned into a crime scene). Really? You really believe that?

So the jewellery etc is worth R90,000 (the stuff taken) and R250,000 (the ring she hid). R340,000 altogether. That is more than 20 times the contract price. Please explain what you think Shrien was expecting to happen to all that stuff when he embarked on the fatal taxi trip? It's not a question of drawing things up in triplicate but just recognising that two paid murderers you have never met before, drawn from a sprawling slum, might not be the most reliable and predictable business partners. I mean what was to stop them killing him too, or just declining to kill her and taking all their ****.

Anyhow, I can see I am beating my head against a brick wall. Neither of you sees the absurdity piled on absurdity of what the SA police have constructed. Presumably you also buy the story that Tongo showed up to collect the balancing payment of R1000 and that Shrien paid it despite being 90 grand down on stolen stuff that was no part of the deal.

You really can't see this makes no sense? Really? Try this: what will Tongo say in cross examination when he's asked his end of the deal? R5000 you'll say. Alright:

1 when was it agreed?
2 when was it paid?

What's he going to say then?

Same for Mbololmbo.

ETA SS, the jewellery cannot be part of the spoils. That's not what any of them says. Why on earth would they lie about that if it were true?

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.

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.

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".

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.

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?

 

[Suffolk Skeptic]

No, and I wish the party opposite would man up and answer the difficult questions. Why is the jewellery not in their story? For one thing, it becomes a lot more complicated. Try to construct it. Somebody from the guilt side first please. Tell us what the plan was, or might have been. I bet you can't come up with anything remotely plausible that also explains why Tongo and Mbolombo are silent about it.

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?

 

[Ampulla of Vater]

I don't understand why the jewelry has to be part of the plan at all. Most likely it wasn't even brought up. Dewani probably figured he would get it back before she was buried. Maybe he didn't even think about it at all.

 

[lionking]

This guy touches down in a foreign country and immediately contracts with a stranger to commit a murder. He arranges a plot that will involve criminal accomplices he has never met, knowing he will be as vulnerable as the intended target.

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.

 

[Rogue Trooper]

I think this is one of the largest elephants in the room in this case. Given that Tongo owed the taxi, even if we accept that he was prepared to be an accessory to murder for so little money in the first place, actually having it committed in the vehicle was guaranteed to deprive him of it - and therefore all his regular and irregular income - for some considerable time. It just doesn't add up.

Did Tongo call the police when he was dropped off?