Website that analyses the Anni Dewani murder in detail

[Passer-by]

I am surprised to hear that you have found such content on our site.  We are very keen to rectify any such errors so your help in pointing this out is much appreciated.

Could you please let us know exactly where we have stated something as factual with no basis other than the fact that it was said under oath.  Please provide both the text and the item numbers as other people have done when suggesting amendments.

Thanks

I didn't reference your website, I was talking about on here.  I find it really tedious that you just keep telling everyone to go and look it up in your website rather than you coming up with the evidence.

As you couldn't be bothered to copy across what No 25 of your 'Baseless' list says, I will do it for you:

"Shrien Dewani’s “changing” versions of events are proof that he was complicit in the hijacking operation. Despite Dewani’s version of events being materially consistent for 4 years, much has been made of the fact that Shrien Dewani gave slightly varying explanations for whose idea it was to visit the townships. In his initial statement, he said that Anni wanted to see “the real Africa” whilst in later interviews he intimated that Tongo suggested a township visit and Anni agreed to it. His initial statement was interpreted by some to be designed to “protect” Tongo from suspicion. Given the totality of the evidence proves Dewani’s innocence, it is clear that the discrepancy in Dewani’s accounts, is due to him having difficulty recalling the precise details of the conversation. This simply reinforces what we already know about victims of traumatic incidents such as carjackings; they are likely to have trouble recalling some or all details. Variances are to be expected. In fact, if accounts were identical it would raise a red flag and suggest a rehearsed or coached statement."

Why did you put 'changing' in inverted commas?  It is a fact that his version of events changed:  I have just given you a credible independent witness in the form of a BBC reporter who he gave an interview to 3 days after Anni's death.  Therefore Dewani's version of events has not remained unchanged for 4 years - and that's without even considering the developments about money for a helicopter trips. 

You have deliberately tried to soften the fact that Dewani unequivocally changed his story by suggesting it was an unimportant detail -  you call it "slightly varying explanations" when in fact it is deeply significant.  If it was, as Dewani is recorded as saying, a spontaneous trip and Anni's idea to go to the Township, the Taxidriver could not have prearranged with the 2 murderers to hijack the car.  As I have provided you with clear evidence that he actually demanded a BBC reporter take this down 3 days after the event I think we can dismiss all your baseless speculation that the poor petal having trouble recalling the details.

I look forward to you, at the very least, moving this item to your 'credible' list.

[Passer-by]

I might also add that the totality of evidence does not prove his innocence.  In court the prosecution could not prove his guilt  - which is a completely different matter.  It is the big gulf between the 2 that we are debating here.

The court didn't even examine all the 'evidence':  it didn't even hear evidence from a key witness - Dewani - for the slightly odd reason that he might implicate himself so had better say nothing. 

[Passer-by]

Doesn't apply to this case. Dealt with in item Baseless (8) - https://dewanifacts.wordpress.com/baseless/

The NPA spared no expense on this trial. Wasted a fortune of SA taxpayers' money.

Spared no expense is a ridiculous statement:  State Lawyers aren't paid as much as private ones and unlike the private ones - who are reeling in massive fees based on hours worked, profile of case, how rich the client is - state lawyers are paid a flat salary.  Surely you can work out that the smartest lawyers are able to command a higher fee, leaving the lower-quality lawyers working for the State?  They start their training at birth:  the kid from a family of rich white lawyers has a distinct head-start over the black kids whose village pulled together to fund him going to school.

[Passer-by]

This is mostly correct but it begs some expansion.

Zola Tongo's evidence was not simply "bad" and incoherent. Everyone is human. Tongo was recalling incidents that took place four years prior. He made many errors and "mistakes" whilst testifying and they did make him appear unreliable as a witness, however those "mistakes" did not make him a liar, nor did they prove Dewani's innocence.

What proved Tongo to be a liar and Dewani innocent, were the significant fabrications and deceptive lies that he told, every one of which was designed to incriminate Dewani and deflect blame from himself. Those are the judge's observations not mine, before you go into pitbull mode Passer-by.

You can ditto what I've said above for Qwabe and Mbolombo who were both caught in similar instances of deception whilst testifying.

Once the hitman story is removed from the equation, Dewani is an innocent man, albeit an adulterous one who was living a bisexual double life that he hid from his wife.


I concur that they may well be the actions of a man who is neither caring, nor honourable. There may also be other reasons for his silence that have nothing to do with those labels. None of us know whether he has or has not approached the Hindocha family to provide further explanation. Maybe he has written them an email or a letter and none of us know about it. Might I remind you that a week after the murder, he did in fact sit down with the entire family and tell them his side of the story and they secretly recorded the meeting and gave the tape to the police. Its possible that this incident may have made Dewani somewhat less willing to sit down and talk to them.

If I were in his position, I think I would want to get my side of the story out. As  I said in response to Mercury earlier in the thread, there could be numerous reasons why he stays silent. It may be that he thinks that whatever he says will be dismissed by those who believe in his guilt. People would say he's had five years to come up with whatever story he tells. If he reads forums such as this one, he would be well founded in such a belief. One only need look at the strong views held by so many people who have never taken the time to actually familiarise themselves with the judgement which is the single best repository of facts on this case.

One of the reasons we set up our DF site, was because it seemed apparent that many of those who followed the trial heard the verdict, spat their coffee out in disgust, never bothered to actually read the well reasoned judgement document, decided that Dewani had  gotten away with murder, and promptly forgot about achieving some justice for the unfortunate young lady who lost her life and who had been so tragically let down by the police and judicial system in South Africa.

The progress of this thread bears testament to this analysis. There appears to be somewhat of a shift toward understanding the facts of the case better and if we can take some responsibility for that, then it lends credibility to our site and our mission. For that we are grateful and we hope that with the fullness of time, we can build enough pressure on SA authorities that they are forced to prosecute Mbolombo and revisit the plea deals struck with Tongo and Qwabe who clearly breached the condition upon which those deals were struck. Truth.

Please substantiate the claim he is bisexual.  We know he is gay:  he has admitted to seeing a gay prostitute - in other words his lawyers agreed in court this is a fact - and we also know as a fact from computer records that he visited gay bondage sites right after his wife died.  We also know he never consummated his marriage with Anni and his previous engagement was also not consummated.  No other girlfriend has ever come forward.  I see no evidence for him being bisexual.  This is important, because a bisexual man could have continued be happily married and have children, whereas a gay man could not, and this is pertinent to motive.

[dewanifacts]

I didn't reference your website, I was talking about on here.  I find it really tedious that you just keep telling everyone to go and look it up in your website rather than you coming up with the evidence.

As you couldn't be bothered to copy across what No 25 of your 'Baseless' list says, I will do it for you:

"Shrien Dewani’s “changing” versions of events are proof that he was complicit in the hijacking operation. Despite Dewani’s version of events being materially consistent for 4 years, much has been made of the fact that Shrien Dewani gave slightly varying explanations for whose idea it was to visit the townships. In his initial statement, he said that Anni wanted to see “the real Africa” whilst in later interviews he intimated that Tongo suggested a township visit and Anni agreed to it. His initial statement was interpreted by some to be designed to “protect” Tongo from suspicion. Given the totality of the evidence proves Dewani’s innocence, it is clear that the discrepancy in Dewani’s accounts, is due to him having difficulty recalling the precise details of the conversation. This simply reinforces what we already know about victims of traumatic incidents such as carjackings; they are likely to have trouble recalling some or all details. Variances are to be expected. In fact, if accounts were identical it would raise a red flag and suggest a rehearsed or coached statement."

Why did you put 'changing' in inverted commas?  It is a fact that his version of events changed:  I have just given you a credible independent witness in the form of a BBC reporter who he gave an interview to 3 days after Anni's death.  Therefore Dewani's version of events has not remained unchanged for 4 years - and that's without even considering the developments about money for a helicopter trips. 

You have deliberately tried to soften the fact that Dewani unequivocally changed his story by suggesting it was an unimportant detail -  you call it "slightly varying explanations" when in fact it is deeply significant.  If it was, as Dewani is recorded as saying, a spontaneous trip and Anni's idea to go to the Township, the Taxidriver could not have prearranged with the 2 murderers to hijack the car.  As I have provided you with clear evidence that he actually demanded a BBC reporter take this down 3 days after the event I think we can dismiss all your baseless speculation that the poor petal having trouble recalling the details.

I look forward to you, at the very least, moving this item to your 'credible' list.

I will discuss with the others whether the quotation marks should be removed. The fact is that his entire version of events remained materially consistent over 4 years with the exception of one or two details such as the car exit and who suggested the township visit first out of Tongo and Anni. As mentioned in the quote from our site, such discrepancies are entirely what one would expect from a victim of a hugely traumatic incident.

I am sorry but I cannot understand what point you are trying to make in your last paragraph.

[dewanifacts]

Please substantiate the claim he is bisexual.  We know he is gay:  he has admitted to seeing a gay prostitute - in other words his lawyers agreed in court this is a fact - and we also know as a fact from computer records that he visited gay bondage sites right after his wife died.  We also know he never consummated his marriage with Anni and his previous engagement was also not consummated.  No other girlfriend has ever come forward.  I see no evidence for him being bisexual.  This is important, because a bisexual man could have continued be happily married and have children, whereas a gay man could not, and this is pertinent to motive.

Lets see if a poster other than myself can point out the multiple factual errors and logic errors in this post.......

[mercury]

Can I just say DF that a PR campaign can often be hoisted by its own petard? IE Even if someone is innocent, the very fact anyone is tryng to drum that into anyone is cause for concern. Innocent people do not need PR gurus IMO, they actually make them look guilty by their massaging of the facts. Im sure yu are intelligent enough to know this as well.

There, that feels better.

 

[Passer-by]

There is a big difference between background information and circumstantial evidence.

Many a strong criminal case has been built on circumstantial evidence alone. It is undoubtedly valid evidence.

None of your information about cape town tourism is evidence. It is just background information.  If it was evidence then you would have been called as a witness in Mngeni and Dewani trials.

I love the way you narrowed it to just mu circumstantial evidence about Cape Town Tourism 

On this thread I have posted detailed information about what MILLIONS of other tourists have done and posted links to credible newspaper stories which clearly illustrate going to MZOLI's is a very minority tourist thing to do and millions of tourists have not done it.  I have even posted irrefutable evidence that MZOLI's shut an hour before the Dewani's left their hotel, so they could not have been planning to visit it.

I have also poste detailed information about booking a helicopter trip.  I have shown that there is a Tourist Information desk at the airport and at the V&A by the hotel which both book the helicopter trips, even if someone accustomed to 5 star hotels where you just get the Concierge to do everything for you forgot to ask them.  I have posted a map showing where the hotel is and where the helicopters are to illustrate it is a short pleasant walk between the two and it nuts to suggest you'd take longer driving it or would give a taxi driver the cash to drive round and organise it.  I have also pointed out that you can just pick up the phone in the room, speak to the helicopter pilot yourself and pay over the phone with your UK credit card, just as you would here.

I have posted a map with all the banks and ATMs in the V&A so you can see he was only a minute's walk from the nearest and had no need to vanish for 45 minutes with the Taxi Driver allegedly to change money at an illegal money changer - which SO unfortunately left him with no proof he changed any cash so we only know he was alone with the Taxi driver for 45mins whilst Anni was at the pool on the day of the murder and we have no proof what they were doing.

I have posted detailed information about Cape Town airport - way beyond the knowledge of a tourist, because my husband flew so much I also spent hours every week parked outside with the taxi drivers and at various times parked my car in the carpark - so know that's how far you have to go to find an illegal taxi - hired cars, took hotel shuttles and jumped in taxis.

I have posted an interactive Google Map which marks out the key points on Anni's last journey, with a picture of each place and a description.

I have given detailed descriptions of what, as a resident of Cape Town, the local perception of that Township, area is and given the gauge that I, as someone not afraid to travel alone all over South Africa including through other townships, would not want to go to that one even accompanied by armed ex-special forces friends.  I have made the analogy of it being like staying at the Savoy but ignoring London nightlife and going to look at something like Elephant and Castle, but at the distance of Brighton, to give a proper idea of the likelihood of someone wanting to do it, and I have posted a photo of the route from the airport to show Anni would have seen what Townships looked like before she set out in a sparkly cocktail dress that evening allegedly to visit one.

I have given links and pictures of MZOLI's so you can gauge for yourself whether Anni was in fact dressed in anticipation of visiting a roadside Barbecue.

I have expanded your knowledge of the culture and history of South Africa so will understand just how uneducated and unsophisticated the bottom of the pile is to show you who had the upper hand when it came to scheming, lying and deceiving people because it really is unlikely a man like Tongo has manipulated a man like Dewani and not the other way round.

I have shared my experiences of conducting business in South Africa to show how dishonest the whole lot are, so there is nothing unusual about the other 3 constantly changing their stories.

But you don't reply to any of these hugely informative posts:  you just label them as 'tourist information' and ignore them then refer people back to your blog and insist the only evidence that counts is what was said in court.  You dismiss everything that was not in court, even though your own blog elaborately weaves a highly subjective story.

[Passer-by]

I will discuss with the others whether the quotation marks should be removed. The fact is that his entire version of events remained materially consistent over 4 years with the exception of one or two details such as the car exit and who suggested the township visit first out of Tongo and Anni. As mentioned in the quote from our site, such discrepancies are entirely what one would expect from a victim of a hugely traumatic incident.

I am sorry but I cannot understand what point you are trying to make in your last paragraph.

You completely ignored the FACT that these very MAJOR changes in his story indicate (a) he is lying and (b) the hijack could not have been arranged if the visit to the Township was spontaneous and Anni's idea.

It is plain as a pike staff the story was meant to be 'we were hijacked on our way back from Strand'.  Go and Google Strand as you don't like me telling you 'tourism facts'.  She was clearly dressed for dinner at what she imagined a night out in Strand would be like.  Someone - almost certainly Max Clifford - later pointed out you can drive to Strand perfectly safely on the highway without getting hijacked, so there had to be a reason why they weren't on the highway - he said it was Anni's idea to throw suspicion off everyone else, but then the other 3 were arrested and he had to shift the blame or look like he was part of it.

My last paragraph refers to your blog:  I have proved this is not 'baseless' so should not be in that list.

[dewanifacts]

Can I just say DF that a PR campaign can often be hoisted by its own petard? IE Even if someone is innocent, the very fact anyone is tryng to drum that into anyone is cause for concern. Innocent people do not need PR gurus IMO, they actually make them look guilty by their massaging of the facts. Im sure yu are intelligent enough to know this as well.

There, that feels better.

 

We're not in the slightest concerned about being hoisted by any petard as we aren't a PR outfit. Of the long diatribe posted above, not one ounce constitutes evidence. If it was, then it would have been introduced by the prosecutors as part of their case with a witness or witnesses providing the court with testimony as to what tourists do, where they change money, how easy it is to find helicopters and other such information.

Passer-by.  Anni told her cousin Sneha that the sex with Dewani was ok but not as good as with her ex. They consumated the marriage on a number of occasions, just not on the wedding night (allegedly).

Only Dewani can know if he likes women as well as men. See Baseless (11).

As for the part about a bi man being able to happily live with a family whilst a gay man couldn't? If you believe this to be an accurate statement then far be it from me to try to teach you otherwise. Good luck with life!

[Passer-by]

So let's have a look at it:  it purports to want Justice for Anni, but unfortunately it has a huge amount of ranting about a people who call themselves 'Justice4Anni' - even an 'open letter' to them.  For a site that wants Justice for Anni in the form of jailing several South Africans, I'm surprised the site is completely bereft of any links to South Africa, no campaign address to write to, no petition to sign, no background information, no profiles of the individuals, no maps:  it's just a numbered list of items you have rather boldly called 'facts'.  Let's examine them.

Claims Proven Beyond Reasonable Doubt to be TRUE

Speculation and/or Subjective Opinion:

4, 5 uses the cover-all term 'reputable' because there has been legal dissent 6, 7, 8, 9, 33 - the evidence of the 3 witness was considered utterly unreliable for the prosecution, and therefore the same holds true for the defence, 34, 35, 40 - everything after the first sentence, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 58, 59.

In particular, points 50-59 seem to be some personal vendetta against a group called 'Justice4Anni' which has no bearing whatsoever on the crime.

I note that in point 9 it states the hitman story was fabricated to incriminate Dewani, yet in the quote from the judgement below it just demonstrates that "so many mistakes, lies and consistencies that one simply cannot know where the lies end and the truth begins" and that "all three witnesses  . . . capable of attempting to twist their version to implicate the accused" - that is much less clear cut than 'the hitman story was fabricated to incriminate Dewani".

27 is conjecture not proved beyond reasonable doubt - and she could have seen the gun pointed at her and put her hand up in defence.  An execution can be planned but still badly executed.

36:  "in the weeks following the murder [followed by more subjectivity] the Dewani Family appointed Max Clifford" - incorrect:  they appointed him 10 days after the murder, you need to knock the 's' off the overstated weeks of negative press sentiment.

So of your 59 claims *proven beyond reasonable doubt to be TRUE* 25 of them are speculation, your own subjective opinion, inaccurate or irrelevant.

[Passer-by]

I should have added point 41:  it gives the impression that the tip of ZAR15,000 left for the staff of the Cape Grace was inside a thank-you card - in fact when he paid his bill by credit card (some might say in the same manner he should have paid for a helicopter trip) he just doubled his bill and said half was a tip:  he didn't put the money physically into their hands.  As I believe is noted elsewhere, the packet of Thank You cards can be seen in the white CNA bag leaving the hotel with Tongo.

[Passer-by]

Claims Supported By Credible Evidence

Speculation and/or Subjective Opinion:

2, 5 - I've seen no evidence he gave thank you cards to the staff (you have no evidence at all anywhere on your site) and the end of the last sentence is in itself subjective, and clearly the pizza party wasn't just 'deemed' insensitive it actually was, 6 - the opening of last sentence is subjective, 7, 8, 9 - whilst it is fact that he changed his story about his exit from the car, it is speculation that he did so to cover for cowardice, 10, 11, 13, 14 - what was in the bag and what Tongo May or may not have realised and then done are just conjecture.

12 SAPS was trying follow the correct procedures, it is your conjecture why they chose not to interview him in the UK, just as it's our conjecture why he didn't take the witness stand at his own trial.

15 is utterly unremarkable:  until trackers came in all company vehicles were 'borrowed' at night and weekends:  one of the reasons for high RTAs used to be all the unlit cars crawling along at night trying not to draw attention to themselves.

So at least 11 of of your 15 Claims Supported By Credible Evidence are speculation or subjective opinion and incredibly you provide no supporting evidence.  Take a leaf out of some of the cases on this site, which have maps, links to press articles, copies of witness statements etc. 

[Passer-by]

Claims Proven Beyond Ressonable Doubt to be FALSE

Speculative and/or subjective opinion:

4, 7 and 9

With regard to 8:  it is worth noting that Golden Touch is a jewellers, not a money-changer - however it trades gold.  It is literally 5 steps from a major branch of First National Bank in the CBD, where there are many other banks and places to change money.  The owner of the shop did not record the transaction, which is illegal.  The area is still mostly for working black people and is full of signs and people handing out flyers saying 'we pay cash for gold'.  South Africa has a limit on how many rands its citizens can take out of the country each year: it's well known that instead they used to fly out wearring expensive jewelry and come back without it.  I had to fill in forms and provide proof of purchase for my own jewelry on one occasion.  It's also well known the area's 'antique' jewellers sell items that are being fenced. Tongo screwed up his evidence:  he said Dewani had asked to go somewhere he didn't need his passport to change money, then he wasn't sure exactly what he said. 

However it is definitely not proven beyond all reasonable doubt to be FALSE that "Dewani changed his money at Golden Touch Jewellers because he wanted to avoid a paper trail:  on the contrary, it was proven he did leave no paper trail.

Herewith the testimony of the owner of the store:
http://citizen.co.za/257708/dewani-trial-currency-exchange-store-owner-testifies/

We can only speculate why he would want to do that.

[Passer-by]

By the way, I think you should note from that report that Dewani's own lawyer says he withdrew £800 at a V&A Waterfront bank, you may want to reference the map I posted showing you how close they are to his hotel.