Tuesday, January 6, 2015

How Did Shrien Dewani Manage To Walk Free?

His defense played a clever game and it paid off, he walked.

All long he denied he was gay, right up the the opening minute of the trial.

His team knew the prosecution would bring up his sexuality as a motive for having his wife killed, and, given his culture, it was a big no no.

Knowing this, the defense decided they would pull the rug from under the prosecutions feet by having him admit , albeit minimising, his sexuality.

Rather than admit he was homosexual with no interest of any kind in women (plus it would also show why he cancelled his first engagement) they minimised it to him being bisexual, (though i would like to know if he has had sex with a woman or even got to first or second base with one)

At a stroke, it meant all the evidence which pointed to his sexuality and thus a whopping big motive for murder was stopped dead.

His previous male lovers, the texts, the visiting of gay dating. contact sites was  ruled irrelevant and thus not heard nor open to cross examination.

It meant that Anni who it is clear had learned of his sexual orientation would tell not only her family but his family as well and the resultant shame etc that would come from  him being outed.

It also meant she would likely sue him for divorce ( although how that would work out since they weren't legally married AFAIK).

It also meant that should she walk away, both he and his family would be liable to repay a huge chunk of money to her family for the cost of the wedding.

Him being outed would bring cultural shame on his family and also would result in a large payout  to Anni and her family.

By admitting to being bisexual, he pretty much  ended a huge chunk of the prosecutions case, he and his team stopped a huge part of the motive being introduced and cross examined.

Given this, it was not unexpected the case would fail since legally there was no motive.

His motives were shame  to himself and his family for being gay and he had to stop that happening.
Being gay was his dirty little secret.

There was the money side of things - he could face a huge payout for the cost of the wedding and also compensation to Anni ( also likely a payoff to keep her quiet about his sexual preferences)

Sex and money are pretty big motives.

Take them away and there were only the words of those who did the deed.

He knew he was safe when his defense team said he would take the stand, promised he would take the stand to explain everything away.

They knew without the sex and money motives the case would be tossed.

The CCTV was incriminating in that. given the guy was the driver in the taxi that his wife was driven off in and subsequently murdered, why would he contact the guy and pay him money owed?

Normal and expected behavior would be you wouldn't pay money owed, you would be demanding the police arrest the guy.

Even his initial statements as revealed by independent witnesses showed he was deceptive.

His suit was immaculate, not dirty or ruffled or messy as if dragged out a car and thrown into the dust.

His inital words to a witness were polite and showed no haste or anger or fear.

(‘He said to me, “Excuse me, is there a nearby police station where I can report a hijack because my wife and I were hijacked”, ’ said Mr Matokazi.)
Shrien dewani arranged for his wife to be murdered so he could continue with his seedy lifestyle.

I just hope her family can  file a civil suit against him.

Since SA has double jeopardy, he could now stand and declare his guilt, his involvement and he could not be retried.

If he does, he would wait until any civil suit had been dealt with.


  1. Muslims are taking over England.They will "own"your country one day.Act upon this.Fuck the shite off.Just saying.Carry on :)

  2. Obama's recent "tangent" to move away from Islamic violence was paper thin.

    1. I agree Peter.
      When it comes to islam he minimises the threat posed, refuses to call their horendous acts of violence terrorism, he is keen to integrate muslims into his fold.
      I was shocked when he compared christian atrocities to muslim atrocities.
      Yes, christians committed atrocities centiries ago and not only against muslims but also other christians and religions.
      Over time, christianity has moved on, there are still crimes commited christian on christian, less so than in past decades as christians are learning tolerance.
      The same cannot be said for muslims as even today they are commiting atrocities not only against other religions, also against other muslims who belong to a different sect/tribe/whatever.

      He refuses to accept islam is a miltant religion, he refuses to condemn their atrocities committed against innocent people, when he does acknowledge an issue he minimises it.

      I wonder if he is indeed a muslim, perhaps hiding behind a christian facade?
      Would he have been elected if he were a muslim?
      Would he have been reelected if he came out as a muslim?
      Many people had issues with him being black, and, as we have seen, he is not afraid to play the race card if he thinks it will make him look good.
      When things go bosoms up, he is the first to minimise his role and distance himself.
      He refuses to accept responsibilty for his actions.
      There is much which is unknown about him, stuff that should be public knowledge as it has been with every other president.
      We know little to nothing about his birth, little to nothing about his school records.
      Little to nothing about how he funded all his travels.
      Even his medical records are pretty much withheld.
      When someone hides their background from the public when they are a public servant, then there is a good reason.

      I wonder if, when he leaves office, things will come out that should have come out before he first stood.
      I wonder if laws will change regarding who is eligible to stand.

  3. Dear Tania Cadogan (AKA known as “HobsNob”),

    Greetings! I write you with question from frozen tundra Siberia where even here your fame as freedom soldier of justice for innocent Madeleine McCann remains well known! Thank you my sister!

    My question in area relating “internet troll.” If person, who real name is seen clearly by all in commentator section, then same person post reply using fake troll name talking to self using what you call profane words what we call профанация. Question: this person who profane self doing more like harm self (cutting) or pleasure self (masterbater) or only hiding identity to make alibi?

    Thank my UK friend!

    Nikolaevna Preobrazhensky Grebenshchikov


Post a comment