Let's all take a moment to behold Passer-by's example of "objective facts". Dewani said it was GBP. The shop owner said it was $US. The shop worker said it was gold. Three different stories and this poster chooses one and labels it "objective fact".
The icing on the cake is the fact that this same poster cannot explain why it would even benefit Dewani to lie about what currency he changed. It's a dead end line of inquiry that does not get us any closer to truth.
I've dealt with the illegal money transaction in the other thread, and I explained that it was not recorded by the shop and no receipt was issued, so it isn't just a 'missing statement oh whoops my filing is crap' it is actually illegal
I also pointed out the amount the shop owner said he 'changed' was different to the amount Dewani said he changed, So already facts aren't adding up.
And then I explained that the normal thing to do would be to go into the bank next door and either change it there or draw money out from the UK at an ATM - and this was also normal for Dewani himself as he had already done this several times.
I pointed out the business owner had a motive to lie about it being a currency exchange because it is a less serious offence not to record currency exchanges than it is to smuggle gold, but she didn't know that Dewani had said 'sterling' when she said dollars, and then had to stick to that point, vehemently contradicting Dewani when she appeared in court.
And finally I pointed out that the only person with no reason to lie was Thelma, the assistant who actually carried the gold to the trader in the back of that shop and brought the money back: that's all her job is, in my experience we can trust her when in her police statement she said gold and it is typical of her white South African boss to pull rank.
As the purpose of the shop is ostensibly to buy and sell second hand precious metals - not even just jewelry - and as I can (irritatingly for you) give you the benefit of my experience of having been in it and can say it is quite unlike any respectable jewellers I've visited in South Africa - its window is barred, the shop is dirty and dingy, they turn customers away at the locked, barred door and they refuse to sell items in their window - we can draw the logical conclusion that he did indeed sell gold not trade currency.
And the only reason for doing that is to have 'secret' money that has no audit trail with either the taxman or the police
. In Dewani's case we can draw our own conclusions as to why a millionaire who drew out £800 in local currency from an ATM also needs secret cash whilst in the company of a man later implicated in the murder of his wife.
And I've explained this before and repeatedly you don't address it.