I made it pretty clear why I stopped engaging you. Namely because I cannot take you seriously and because you steadfastly refused to explore anything other than the unlikehoods of Dewani's story. I conceded that there were aspects of Dewani's story that seemed unlikely and asked you to direct attention to unlikelihoods on the other side of the equation, which I have pasted again below for you have a think about.
Here's the alternative scenario and a few of the highly unlikely events contained within. If one believes the hitman story to be true, then one believes that each and every one of these highly unlikely occurences took place.
The judge didn't buy it. Do you?
Planning stage:
- a man decides to kill his wife of 2 weeks on honeymoon
- this man asks the first taxi driver he meets to organise this murder
- this taxi driver says he cannot help because he is not a criminal, but immediately says that he knows a man who can. Monde Mbolombo
- the taxi driver calls Mbolombo who also says that he is not a criminal and cannot help but conveniently knows a couple of people who can and he immediately calls them and arranges the murder
- these 4 men agree to commit this heinous crime for a 1/4 or 1/5 share of R15000 each, despite 2 of them being fully employed and their share of the proceeds being equivalent to a few days salary.
- the taxi driver is willing to risk his car which is his livelihood all for this paltry return
Operational stage:
- the taxi driver makes no effort to ensure that the money is in the glovebox as "agreed" before the first pass through Gugulethu
- the man does not even have the "agreed" R15000 on his person so he is short changing the two unknown dangerous gunmen who will be carrying out his murder operation whilst he is in the taxi with them.
The aftermath stage:
- the man who is clearly aware of cctv cameras everywhere, borrows a policemans phone to invite the taxi driver back to a hotel to receive the balance of the murder payment
- 3 of the 4 conspirators at first admit that it was a robbery gone wrong and describe the man as an innocent victim, corroborating the story told by the man
- suddenly like dominoes, all 3 conspirators change their story to implicate the man - in exchange for generous lenient sentences.
The court process stage:
- Whilst telling this "truthful" story in court, the conspirators contradict each other on each and every material detail relating to the crime and are caught fabricating evidence to incriminate the man, despite their plea deals being contingent upon telling the truth.
Your recent posts are going even further down the road of speculation built upon even more speculation, with the incredible result being that you are "almost certain" that you are correct, despite having no proof whatsoever to substantiate your claims.
What is your source for the claim that Dewani's PA (Sian I believe her name was) pre-booked Tongo? This was one of the early rumours but was disproven and it is common cause fact that Dewani met Tongo for the first time at the airport when he landed. Do you understand what "common cause fact" means? It means that a fact is accepted as being true by all parties; prosecution, defence and the court itself. Do you not think that if Tongo had been pre-booked that it might have bolstered the State's case, and that they would have introduced such claims in court, had there been any evidence to that effect?
I won't waste any further time on this point (or any other points that have already been disproven).
Mr Dewani's travel money transactions were not at all strange or suspicious. Many travellers primarily rely on their card to withdraw cash from ATMs but most will also take a backup supply of their local cash or of any other currency that they happen to have, just in case their card gets swallowed by a machine or is blocked. Nothing worse than being stuck in a foreign country without being able to access money. There is nothing unusual about Dewani making an ATM withdrawal and there is nothing unusual about him having a parcel of £GBP (or $US if you believe the jewellery store owner) with him that he converted to local currency. You are trying to imply that this is somehow proof of wrongdoing when in fact it proves nothing at all. The fact that he went to the jeweller can be very simply explained by him asking Tongo to recommend a place to exchange some money at a good rate and Tongo taking him to the jewellery store.