RECAP ON FEW THINGS AND ARTICLES

Sica sent nude photos of girlfriend to family: court

Amelia Bentley

August 26, 2009

The murdered Singh siblings, from left, Neelma, 24, Kunal, 18, and Sidhi, 12. Photo: Supplied

Accused killer Max Sica gave his then-girlfriend Neelma Singh drugs before taking nude photographs of her and emailing them to her family and friends, a court has heard.

Archana Pathik, the elder sister of Neelma, Kunal and Sidhi Singh whom Sica is charged with murdering in their home in 2003, began her evidence at a committal hearing in Brisbane Magistrates Court yesterday.

Dressed in a black suit and wearing black high heels, Mrs Pathik said she "never liked" Sica, who Neelma sought a restraining order against in a bid to get him to "stay away".

She said Neelma told her Sica admitted he was the one who emailed the nude photographs to her family and friends in late 2002.

She said Neelma confided that she used cocaine given to her by Sica before the photos were taken.

She said Neelma also told her that when her relationship with Sica broke down, he would hide behind a portable toilet on a property under construction near the Singh's home in Grass Tree Court, Bridgeman Downs, and watch their house.

"She was fearing, she was scared he was going to do something to her," Mrs Pathik told the court.

"She said he wanted to keep a close eye. He would park his car and walk and try and monitor the house and monitor movements at the house."

Sica's defence barrister Sam Di Carlo asked Mrs Pathik during cross-examination if she liked Sica.

"I never liked him," she said.

"Even from the beginning?" Mr Di Carlo asked.

"That's right," she said.

Mrs Pathik said it was Sica who phoned to tell her that Neelma, 24, Kunal, 18 and 12-year-old Sidhi were dead.

She said the news caused her to have a "severe asthma attack" and she believed Sica knew she suffered bad asthma and intended to trigger an attack.

"Because he's done that before," she said.

Mrs Pathik said when Sica made the call a police officer took his phone off him "because he was not meant to make that phone call".

Mr Di Carlo asked Mrs Pathik "Do you really really hate Max? Are you prepared to say anything to destroy him?"

Mrs Pathik replied "I choose not to answer that question".

Earlier yesterday Mrs Pathik gave evidence her sisters were scared in the days leading up to their murder.

She said when she saw her sister on April 18 2003, three days before the siblings' murder, Neelma was complaining of an injured arm which she was "really distressed" about.

"She said she slept on it, but I know my sister," she said.

"She kept holding onto her arm - I asked Sidhi (about it). She had a massive look of fear on her face."

When the family went to play soccer in a Brisbane park, Neelma kept "looking around, there was something there they were not disclosing to me".

At about 8pm on Easter Sunday Mrs Pathik said she was chatting to Neelma on an online chat site but the conversation ended when Neelma wrote "Someone is at the door, I have to go".

She told the court she tried to phone the family home the next day, Easter Monday, but got no answer.

During her evidence, Mrs Pathik asked Magistrate Brian Hine to direct Sica's barrister Sam Di Carlo not to smile at her.

"Could the defence please stop making faces and smiling. Mr Sam Di Carlo. And the public, thank you," she said, referring to sniggers coming from Sica's family in the public gallery.

Mr Di Carlo stood and objected.

"As far as I'm concerned whatever her name is, Archana, should compose herself. It's her behaviour, not mine, which needs to be questioned," he said.

Mrs Pathik, who did not live at the family home and was given the responsibility of being her siblings' "shadow" while her parents were away in Fiji on business at the time of the deaths, will continue her evidence this morning.

Notes.....Who was at the door 8pm Easter Sunday night 2003? Why did Archana not call her sister back that night? When Archana called on Monday and kept on getting no answer, was she not worried about her siblings? (especially when she says that her sisters were scared days before their muders, and Sidhi had a massive look of fear on her face when asked about Neelma`s sore arm) Why did she not call them on Tuesday and see if all was ok?

When Archana was asked by defence if she really hated Max and was prepared to say anything to destroy him, she chose not to answer that question. She also says that she hated Max from the very beginning.

About Neelma saying to her that she took drugs before those nude photos were taken of her, well in my opinion and if she (Neelma) actually did say that at all, she only did so as not to make it seem like she would have doneso otherwise. Neelma had actually phoned a member of the Sica family about the nude photos and never once mentioned she had taken drugs supplied to her by Max. You would think that she would have stated that particular detail, at least i would.

Even though Archana says Neelma told her that Max had admitted emailing the photos, Neelma continued seeing Max. Neelma did have a sore arm and on Thursday 17th April 2003 (5 days before murders discovered) she rung Max and asked if he could bring her some pain killers for a sore arm. Max`s father gave him some to bring to her and they were found at the Singh residence.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr V.J. Singh took his daughter Neelma with him to the Stafford Police Station to make a complaint about Max Sica. (this was not long after the confrontation he had with Sica in his home) In that taped confrontation Mr Singh is heard saying to Sica, "just you wait, you dont know what im capable of, you will see, you`re gonna get it"

The officer in his statement says that Mr Singh was doing all the talking and that his daughter seemed like she did not want to be there, he also says that when he asked to look at the text messages sent to her by Max, he found them to contain nothing threatening or allarming. Mr Singh also told the officer that he would be leaving the country and that he feared for his daughters safety etc, the officer had asked Mr Singh if he had neighbours which could keep an eye on his children to which he responded no. etc etc etc. Like i have already stated on this blog, if you as a parent, would think your children would be in any danger at all and from whatever or whomever, why would you leave them at all? I am a parent and i understand that people dont all think alike, but i would never leave my children if i would think such a thing. Mr Singh had also recieved threatening phone calls from Fiji, on these calls you can hear two men saying they know where his family lives and that he had f**** with their families and now they would f***** with his. Rape his daughters kill his family etc etc. He did not mention that to the officer at all.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Socked foot impressions with some amount of bleach found not on the 22nd of April but apparently some days later at crime scene. Max Sica`s footprints taken a year later. Alleged murder weapon found in garage, again not on the 22nd April but days later by Det Zitny.

Coroner states children could have died anywhere from three days up until few hours before they were found.

Police BELIEVE children died late Easter Sunday night early Monday morning. Max was asleep in his bed on Sunday night and from 7am Monday morning up until discovery of murders even police acknowledge that Max has firm alibi. In my opinion police continue saying they believe they died then because it is the only time Max (in their eyes) had no strong alibi, even though family members saw Max at home and in his bedroom.

When police questioned Mr Anil Lala, (an ex-boyfriend of Neelma`s and the person who had sent text wanting to meet with Neelma on the Easter Monday morning behind his old house) he told police he too was sleeping in his bed on Sunday night and that his parents were in their room and they were fine with what he told them.

On the Easter Monday night around 830pm and around 5 past midnight on Tuesday morning, people who lived near the Singh residence reported hearing screams and one woman in particular said she heard a bone chilling scream (from what seemed a young woman), that lasted around 3 to 4 minutes at around 5 past midnight Tuesday morning, she said it frightened her so much that she woke her husband and told him to look downstairs. She told this to police the day after the discovery of the murders.

Two women at 5.30am on Tuesday morning were taking a walk and saw a man walking down towards them from near the Singh residence, they stated that when this man looked up and saw them, he turned and ran the other way and jumped a fence. These women gave police a description of this man, the description was not of Max Sica.

A man by the name of Paul Surri was working in the area at that time, he had told police he had seen the youngest sibling (Sidhi Singh) outside the front door of her home on the Easter Monday, police told him he must have been mistaken, but he was adamant he saw her then and stated this in court at committal.

A friend of Kunal Singh (Jaga) went to police and conjured up a story about seeing Max with Kunal`s body over his shoulder on the Easter Sunday night at the Singh residence. Mr Jaga was made police informant and over the course of about 3 and a half months later, police started to question the validity of what Mr Jaga was telling them. He then confessed it was all a lie, he was never charged with obstruction of justice or purjury. At committal he had his rights (as not to incriminate himself) and answered questions put to him by defence with, "i do not wish to answer".

Ms Bowman (who police allege had her own reasons and agenda`s for getting involved in this case and never worked for them) went to police shortly after discovery of murders and told them she knew Max (even though she had not seen him in nearly 10 yrs prior to this) and got involved.

You can never judge a book by its cover as you cannot judge a case based upon sensational media headlines and testimonies based on hearsay.

GOING TO TRIAL

The Sica family has known from the very beginning that this case would go to trial, it is no surprise to them at all. The state has spent $20 million so far on this case. The Sica family have stood and will stand by Max 100%. The family and people who truly know Max know who he is.

For those few who have made extremely vile comments, i just hope that one day it does not happen to you or a loved one to be in a similar position and to know exactly what it feels like.

For those who leave a comment and claim to know the family personally, please do speak with the family im sure they would be quite interested in all aspects of what it is you have to tell them.

Thank you to all the people who support Max and to others that dont know him or know much about this case but at least have the decency to comment appropriately, without being Judge, Jury and executioner, for this is only (in my opinion) a sign of ignorance.

BRISBANE TIMES ARTICLE IN PAPER TODAY 5/10/10

Sica witness denies lying
Amelia Bentley
October 5, 2010 - 5:00AM

A friend of slain teenager Kunal Singh has denied creating a story to help implicate Max Sica in the Singh siblings' murders, in order to remove suspicion he was the killer.

In Brisbane Magistrates Court yesterday, Anil Jaga refused to answer several questions thrown at him by Mr Sica's defence barrister Sam Di Carlo, who accused him of lying to detectives.

Mr Sica, 40, is accused of the grisly murders of Neelma, Kunal and Sidhi Singh, whose bodies were found in a spa in their home at Bridgeman Downs, in Brisbane's north, in April 2003.

Police allege he killed her, along with her brother and sister, following an argument at their home, while their parents were in Fiji on business.

Today, a tape was played in court showing Mr Jaga agreeing to become a police informant to feed detectives information on Mr Sica in August 2005.

At that time, Mr Sica was under investigation for the murders. He was not arrested and charged until late 2008.

Mr Di Carlo asked Mr Jaga if he made up information he gave to the police.

"Did you tell these lies in order to inculpate Max Sica as to exculpate yourself for murdering Kunal, Neelma and Sidhi?" he asked.

"No," replied Mr Jaga.

"Did you do it to get your 15 minutes of fame?" he asked.

"No," replied Mr Jaga.

Mr Jaga, who the court heard had known Kunal since primary school, refused to answer whether police officers told him they were determined to "get Max Sica" because they had made up their mind he was the killer.

Mr Jaga is not first witness in the case Mr Di Carlo has suggested were involved in the deaths.

He asked the siblings' father Vijay Singh if he had organised the murders and had "set up" Mr Sica.

"No way," Mr Singh said.

The committal hearing continues.



This is what was printed in paper regarding yesterday`s witness court appearance.
The heading of the article WITNESS DENIES LYING is a joke in itself. All Mr Jaga ever did was lie through his teeth. There are many video tapes of police interviews with Mr Jaga where it tells the story as it is .....
Another thing this article did not mention (i guess because the reporters were there for only a relatively short time)is that Mr Jaga was never charged for commiting purjury and obstructing the course of justice.
READ POST BELOW THIS ONE .........................

WITNESS FABRICATES EVIDENCE ABOUT SICA CARRYING FRIENDS DEAD BODY

Today (Monday 4th October) a witness by the name of Anil Jaga was called in by defence. This witness was informed by the judge that since he could incriminate himself, he didnt have to answer the questions put to him, so if he chose to, he could respond with "I do not wish to answer".

Mr Jaga had gone to police in 2005 and stated that he was at the scene of the crime on Sunday 20th April 2003. He said he had parked his car in a nearby street and not in front of the house. He said that he went there to see his friend Kunal Singh and that when he got there he looked through the glass panel of the front door and saw Mr Sica carrying Kunal Singh`s body over his shoulder on the stairway. He also tells police that he then went through the back entrance to see what was going on and that he had a video camera with him. He then told them that he was taping and that he thought Mr Sica had seen him so he ran out of the house down the street and hid the tape in a drain (just in case Mr Sica caught up with him). He says that when he went to retrieve this tape (one week later) it had rained so the tape was ruined.

Tapes were shown in court today of Mr Jaga at the police station. On these tapes you see Mr Jaga making the above statements to police. Police at one point ask Mr Jaga to sign a document making him a police informant. Mr Jaga continues to say that what he saw is true, he also says a lot of other things about Mr Sica, this goes on for about three and a half months.

He and Katrina (Kunal Singh`s then girlfriend) were romantically involved some time after Kunal Singh`s death. He had also told her what he had told police like he also told his mother and a few other people. There were apparently different versions by him said to these people than the version he had told police. Police had said to Mr Jaga before this (and on more than one occasion) that if he was making it up, he still had a chance to come clean and that if he didnt and they found out he had been lying, he could be prosecuted. Mr Jaga was also asked by police to take a polygraph test at about that time. (to which when asked in court today if he had taken that polygraph test his answer was, "i do not recall") Police start to question the validity of Mr Jaga`s claims so they confront him. His mother is seen on tape at a police station waiting for her son to enter the room. Her son, a female and male officer enter the room and start to question him. They tell him that things dont add up and that if he is lying he should tell the truth. They continue on and say to him do it for your mother, tell the truth, you say you love your mother so much, then they say, do it for Sidhi (the youngest Singh sibbling) she was a child, she didnt deserve this, then they say do it for Katrina, (i did not hear anyone say, do it because what you did is just wrong) Why did they want to make him confess in the presence of his mother?

Mr Jaga then says, yes, its true, its all a lie ALL HE SAID ABOUT MR SICA WAS A LIE. Police respond by saying he did an honorable thing, that it was commendable what he tried to do etc etc. The Male officer says to Mr Jaga that some damage had been done and that there would need to be some sort of damage control. The female officer asks Mr Jaga if Mr Sica was aware of what he had been saying, Mr Jaga responds, no, i told you, it was all a lie. The female officer says, we need to know if Mr Sica has knowledge of you saying this, if he does, we need to put you under police protection.

There is so much more that was said by Mr Jaga and it will be made available at some stage.

In court today Mr Jaga was asked many questions to which he responded, "i do not wish to answer", "i do not recall" and a no here and there. When he was asked why he would fabricate such a story his answer was "i do not wish to answer". He was asked if the Singh`s would have asked him to fabricate the story as to inculpate Mr Sica, he answered "no", he was asked if he fabricated the story to inculpate Mr Sica as to disculpate himself from committing the crimes and had killed Kunal, Sidhi and Neelma, he answers "i do not wish to answer".

Mr Jaga is asked if he was ever charged for lying and for obstruction of justice, he answers "i do not wish to answer" He is then told by the judge that he can answer that question and should, Mr Jaga then responds, NO.

So Mr Jaga is practically given a pat on the back and honored for waisting police time, fabricating evidence and more, he also had his rights on the stand not to answer questions so not to incriminate himself, and then WAS NEVER CHARGED WITH PERJURY. On a tape you see an officer tell Mr Jaga, we dont want Max Sica to walk (incase Mr Jaga was making up the story then in 2005) but Mr Jaga got to walk, talk commit an offence and not get charged.

Today in court there were a couple of female reporters, (courier mail and Brisbane times i think) they stayed for a short while and then left.

Tomorrow Ms Bowman will be further cross examined and then Mr Jaga will be back on the stand.

Like i have already stated, unless you are in the same position of having the whole weight of the law on top of you and unless you know all the facts, you just dont have the whole picture.

Lead Detective Leaks Evidence Of CMC Documents To Witness - WHERE WAS THE MEDIA?

Detective Senior Sergeant Joeseph Zitny prepared a 9 page document, which contained a "summary" of Ms Andrea Bowmans testimony during the CMC inquiry in 2006 and emailed it to her for the preparation of her statement, a court has been told.

Ms Bowman was asked repeatedly about the process she had adopted to prepare her statement, and said that she had used media articles, emails, text messages, notes, etc, but did not recollect the 9 page CMC document.Mr Di Carlo produced and email from Mr Zitny to Ms Bowman dated the 11th of march 2009, to which was attached a 9 page summary of what Ms Bowman had told the court at the CMC hearings in 2006. Ms Bowman said that she could not recall Mr Zitny saying he'd provide a summary from the CMC transcripts for her statement, but agreed it was provided to her.

When asked about the conversation on the 22/04/08 which was recorded, Ms Bowman said that she had no recollection of Mr Sica saying to her, " (i wont give you what you want, why on earth out of all people would i tell you anything?)" but recalled Max had said this before, during the early days. Ms Bowman also had no recollection of Max saying to her, "IF I SAID THAT, (refering to the remorse statement that the media sensationalised) IT WOULD HAVE BEEN FOR ONE THING, AND ONE THING ONLY......." we will fill in the gaps later to avoid leading Ms Bowman as she is currently under cross examination. Or when he said "it appears you are trying to get me" or when Max asked her who the cops would use after her.

Mr Di Carlo asked why she couldn't recall much under cross examination and yet, was able to provide a chronological sequence of events, emails and phone conversations during evidence in chief and Ms Bowman agreed that she would look at her statement.

For five and a half years prior to his arrest on 30/12/08, and uptil today, Mr Sica has been through "trial by media." They were present for every raid, every police interview, every forensic procedure order carried out on Max. They even made headlines about him being booked for driving his brothers unregistered vehicle, despite max being unaware.

Ms Andrea Bowman has alledged that Max had made "partial confessions"' to her. Where is the media I wonder, as the polices' "star" witness is being cross examined, and evidence of official police misconduct is coming out. For the majority of this commital proceedings, the media has stayed away especially during cross examination of witnesses.Let's see if they will be present for another person who claimed to have witnessed Max killing the Singh children on 20/4/03 and later admitted that it was a lie.

The opportunity for the reporters to give Max at least a "fair" trial by media is here, (so if and when Max gets cleared of these or other charges, the public can know the facts) but whether they grasp that, is entirely up to them.Guess in the meantime, we just have to wait and see.........................

COMMITTAL WEDNESDAY 29TH SEPT

Today the papers did not bother to print a thing. Today Ms Bowman was thoroughly cross examined.

I once read a comment which said.............

The media leave out relevant facts in articles which clarifies the situation. They only use selected bits of information to sensationalise the story just to sell newspapers. Like the saying goes, "You don't let the facts get in the way of a good story".

Tomorrow Ms Bowman will be again cross examined, i wonder IF and WHAT the papers will print.

Links to cases where people have been wrongfully accused and most did many years jail. Most people believe a person is guilty because they are charged for that crime, because of what they read in papers, because the law says it has its evidence etc etc. Below are links related to some stories about how anyone can end up in jail and persecuted and then found to be innocent. Some cases it was astounding as to how a person was ever charged in the first place.

Of course im not saying that all people are innocent of what they are accused of, but some think that just because you are charged, you must be guilty.

http://www.watoday.com.au/wa-news/how-the-mallard-case-unfolded-20081007-4vhk.html

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/sunday-mail/graham-stafford-had-no-time-to-kill-leanne-stafford/story-e6frep2o-1225815439042

http://www.lindychamberlain.com/content/story/why

http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/hey-hey-its-a-very-sad-day-for-justice-20100610-y0cz.html

http://thecurvature.com/2010/05/07/release-of-innocent-man-shows-huge-flaws-in-sexual-assault-prosecutions/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graham_Stafford

COMMITTAL TUESDAY 28TH SEPT

by Jasmin Lill

From: The Courier-Mail

September 29, 2010 12:00AM

ACCUSED triple murderer Max Sica once frightened a female friend by following her home with his car lights off, a court heard.

Andrea Bowman said the incident occurred about 20 years ago when the pair were teenagers.

Sica, 40, is facing a committal hearing in the Brisbane Magistrates Court, charged with the murders of his girlfriend Neelma Singh, 24, and her siblings Kunal, 18, and Sidhi, 12.

As teenagers, Bowman said she and Sica would go driving to places including Mt Coot-tha where they'd sit in their cars and talk for hours.

"We were good friends. I felt like a sister to him," she said.

But she said Sica had more romantic feelings towards her, and bought her an expensive toy bear. She told him they had no future as a couple, and claimed his mother later said the rejection had a bigger effect on him than she thought.

Bowman also recalled that Sica followed her home with his car lights off when they were teens. "He frightened me," she said. "I don't know what it was about. It was odd."

She said Sica got out of his car and she screamed at him not to come near her.

"Someone opened their door, some lights came on and he got back in his car."

Bowman said she later spoke to Sica about it, and he said he was just following her to see what she was up to after work.

Under cross-examination by defence counsel Sam Di Carlo, Bowman spoke of the two sides of Sica that she called Massimo and Max. "When we were young, he'd get glassy-eyed, and I thought 'there's something not right'," she said.

Bowman described Max as funny and bright with a softer nature. "He's someone you can be very fond of. That's the side that tends to get down and reflective." The other side seemed to "have more presence". "He can be more threatening. It's just completely contrasting behaviour to the softer, placid side."

The hearing continues.

----------------------------------------------------
Ms Bowman although thinking all this still continued seeing Max, went for drives with him and then was the one to make initial contact with Max many years later when she found out about the Singh murders. She says Max had more romantic feelings towards her and that she just wanted a friendship etc etc, she said he would get glassy eyed and that she thought "there`s something not right"............
Ms Bowman even though feeling what she did about him (when they were teenagers), still made contact with him more than ten years later of her own accord.
Seems strange to me that you would want to see someone so many years later if you truly believe what Ms Bowman has said.

Just A COMMENT

P.S. Ms Bowman also agreed that what is in her statement is inconsistent to her testimony in court. (about max blowing up roma st police station) In her statement she said it was an immature and silly comment from someone who is hurt and angry but still a silly comment, and in court it appeared cold and calculated, that ie max was anxious, nervous and serious. Her reason for the inconsistency - Her "view" on how she viewed things has changed and matured since. She is now 41 years of age.

YOU DO THE MATHS

A WITNESS giving evidence in the case of three murdered siblings has admitted to using newspaper reports to help write her police statement.

Neelma Singh, 24, and her siblings Kunal, 18, and Sidhi, 12, were found dead in the spa at their family's Bridgeman Downs home on Brisbane's northside on April 22, 2003.

Max Sica, who was Neelma's boyfriend in the months before her death, is facing three charges of murder and has been in custody since December 2008.

At a committal hearing in the Brisbane Magistrates Court on Monday, Sica's friend Andrea Louise Bowman said she used newspaper reports to help "time mark'' conversations she had with Sica over seven years.

During cross examination, defence lawyer Sam Di Carlo put to Ms Bowman that without researching newspaper articles she had limited recollections.

"I remember saying to (Sica) 'Have you seen this in the paper?''' Ms Bowman said.



"That's how I initiated contact with him.''

Ms Bowman said she started putting together her statement at a police station but found she was able to remember conversations and events better by doing it in her own time at home and using newspaper reports as prompts.

"The articles were time markers,'' she said.

Mr Di Carlo challenged Ms Bowman on whether it was possible she could confuse the newspaper stories with actual recollections.

"In ordinary human beings our subconscious, when we read something our minds (store it) as memory and we can get part of that story confused with actual recollections,'' Mr Di Carlo said.

"I don't know whether that happens or doesn't happen,'' Ms Bowman said.

Mr Di Carlo asked Ms Bowman if she hears voices.

"Did you hear voices saying 'Shut up, shut up?'''

She replied she heard a "voice of reason'' telling her not to do something in some situations, but not "crazy voices''.

Ms Bowman denied she was writing a book on the Singh murder case.

"I don't have a proposed book, I have had seven years of this, I don't want a day more,'' she told the court.

The court was told Ms Bowman suffers from a neurological condition which in the past had caused her to suffer "seniors moments'' and affected her memory.

The committal hearing continues

YOU DO THE MATHS........
Ms Bowman said in court today, "i have had seven yrs of this, i dont want a day more!"

Ms Bowman was 19 at the time she worked for the Sica family for about a year in 1989. She made allegations against Max`s brother in law and then went to work for Max`s father, whom she later also accused of making a pass at her.

After ten years of no contact, Ms Bowman decided to get in touch with Max as soon as she came to know of the triple murders. The first time she met Max (after the murders) was on the 29th May 2003, she then had a few phone calls and meetings before a significant (4 hr conversation) with Max on 16/07/03. The next day (17/07/03) police went to speak to Ms Bowman about an unrelated matter. Ms Bowman asked the officer about the Singh case and told him that she was a friend of Max`s. She mentioned Max to this officer at least twice, despite the "matter" being unrelated.

Over the years, she spoke to the police 70 times, and was shocked to hear the figure herself. (41 of these conversations are recorded)

The police asked Ms Bowman (and other people close to max) if they would tape record conversations with Max. Detective Zitny gave her a recorder in 2003, which she only used ONCE. Despite telling Det Zitny in 2007 that Max had, and or started making "partial admissions",to her, Ms Bowman continued not to record any of the conversations. Even the "notes" that she made only contained the scenario of which they spoke about, not the conversation itself. On the 22/04/08, five yrs after Max discovered the bodies, Ms Bowman had a conversation with Max where she WAS wearing a police wire.

Ms Bowman herself admitted that she would initiate all contact and conversation, that she would present scenario`s to Max and then they discussed the hypothesis about what the killers may have done. She also acknowledged the fact that she would do most of the talking.

Ms Bowman was in contact with the lead Detective (mr zitny)from 2003.
We all know the different technique police use to carry out investigations, but even a child can tell you that the best method would be to use a suspects friend, or someone close. Ms Bowman herself stated that Max would often ask if she was wired, pat her for bugs, ask if he was busted, (through her), to tell her "detective friends" that he didnt give her any information. She also stated that Max too would record the conversation.

Ms Bowman thought that her conversations with Max was a secret, and only between the two of them. Little does she know that their conversations was a hot topic in the Sica family and friends as Max would avoid her at times and always told everyone that she worked for the police, presenting their scenario`s and then directing questions towards Max as if she was speaking to the real killer.

Initially, she would just ask Max lots of questions about the crime scene and what he saw, she then slowly transitioned the conversations in an attempt to get a "partial admission" through her presentation of different scenario`s and hypothesis and talking to Max as if he was the killer.

Ms Bowman got herself involved in this case out of her own accord, despite having a husband and family. According to the police, Ms Bowman had her "own" reasons and "agendas" for involvement and never worked for them. In 2008, the night prior to either the raid or arrest in relation to the sex charges (will confirm which) Ms Bowman happens to call Max again and tries to organize a meeting for the next day. She then attempted to call Max a number of times when he was out of bail for 6 weeks, even using a different number when she noticed Max not answering.

On the 30th Dec 2008, Max was arrested for the Singh murders,5 and a half yrs after their deaths. Ms Bowman, despite knowing that Max was arrested, called the Sica residence and went over to talk to Max`s wife and mother about the sex charges. (Jan/Feb 2009) She also sent a letter to Max after this event in prison. Funny part is Detective Zitny was working for the child protection and investigation unit at Pine Rivers in 2008, but i guess that too is a coincidence.

I dont know about you, but to me this does not sound like a person who "doesnt want a day more" of this. Everyone knows that if a situation is causing you stress (and moreso none of your business) you avoid the situation altogether. It does not take a genius, but a LOGICAL person to figure out what to do if they do not want to be part of an investigation, especially one as large and complex as the Singh murders. Even his wife lost most of her friends and relatives, because they do not want their names associated with this matter. You dont really need the boring details to add the sum, just do the maths yourself.

COMMITTAL MONDAY 27TH SEPT

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/accused-murderer-had-eyes-like-a-pit-bull-20100927-15th4.html

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/witness-in-max-sica-trial-used-newspaper-reports-to-write-statement/story-e6frg6nf-1225930069862?from=public_rss

http://www.news.com.au/max-sica-accused-of-murdering-singh-siblings-allegedly-told-friend-of-victims-pleas/story-e6freoof-1225930218980?from=public_rss

The police know from day one and so does anybody that has been to the committal and heard the crime scene evidence that Sidhi was killed while she was sleeping. (all evidence points to this. example blood spatter) It was also mentioned during the early years many times in the media.

COMMITTAL FRIDAY 24TH SEPT

Court told Max Sica `confided in writer'
Lisa Martin From: AAP September 24, 2010 4:49PM

A MAN accused of slaying three siblings told a woman writing a book about him that she would become famous if she got his confession, a court has heard.

Neelma Singh, 24, and her siblings Kunal, 18, and Sidhi, 12, were found dead in the spa at their family's Brisbane home on April 22, 2003.

Max Sica, who was Neelma's boyfriend in the months before her death, is facing three charges of murder.

A committal hearing in Brisbane Magistrates Court on Friday heard Sica had been approached to write a book, but he thought his friend Andrea Louise Bowman could do a better job.

Ms Bowman kept diary notes about conversations she had with Sica in 2007.

She said Sica would sometimes become "paranoid", ask her if she was a police officer and wonder aloud if she was scared in his company.

"He asked if I had video surveillance in my sunglasses," she told the committal hearing.


"(During another conversation) he told me 'If you got my confession you would be famous . . . and get paid'."

The court heard Ms Bowman told Sica she had a dream about the killings.

"There were gurgling sounds . . . I just wanted the sound to stop," she said.

"(Sica) said: 'Maybe that's why I ran the spa."'

She said Sica told her Neelma had a bad temper and slept with a machete under her bed.

Ms Bowman told the court she recalled asking Sica whether he killed the children to get back at their mother Shirley Singh, who the court had earlier in the week heard was having an affair with a younger man.

"He said: 'Yes, I blame her, she should never have taken him back'," she said.

Ms Bowman said she had asked Sica if he panicked after killing the Singh siblings.

"He said: 'Of course you panic, you just killed those bitches, you have to get out of there'," she said.

She told the court she remembered telling Sica about a comment his mother had made: "What kind of monster kills them and puts them in a bath to make them into soup?"

"He asked: 'Did she say that?' I said: 'Yes, she said that to me on the phone'... (and) he hung his head," she said.

Defence counsel Sam Di Carlo told the court Ms Bowman had worked with police for four years under the guise of writing a book and her witness statement resembled a Mills and Boon fiction novel.

The committal hearing continues.

COMMITTAL THURSDAY 23RD SEPT

Friend pens book about Singh murder accused Max Sica
Jasmin Lill From: The Courier-Mail September 23, 2010 11:51PM

THE man accused of slaying three siblings was the subject of a book being written by a friend, a court has been told.

Max Sica, 40, is in custody facing a committal hearing in the Brisbane Magistrates Court charged with killing his former girlfriend Neelma Singh, 24, her brother Kunal, 18, and sister Sidhi, 12. Their bodies were found in a spa at their Bridgeman Downs home, on Brisbane's northside, in April 2003.

Sica's friend Andrea Louise Bowman said Sica had been approached to write a book after the killings but he thought she would do it better.

Bowman said she produced four or five pages to show to Sica but she described it as a ''mock book''.

''I was very interested in finding out what was going on with Max. There were way too many inconsistencies,'' she said.

Bowman said Sica was pleased with what she had written, which included a piece on people who had been wrongly imprisoned and later found to be innocent.

She said Sica agreed to get a copy of his criminal record to include in the book, and also posed for pictures.

''I said if he got arrested and taken away, I wouldn't have access to him to take a photo,'' Bowman said.

She said that as she entered his house for a photo shoot in 2006, Sica had checked her camera for listening devices.

While speaking to Sica, she said he spoke of holding Neelma's hand after finding her in the spa. ''He said, `I held Neelma's hand to say goodbye.' He said it was normal, it was soft,'' Bowman said.

But she said Sica later described Neelma's hand as ''curled over and stiff''.

During another conversation in Sica's bedroom, Bowman said Sica got ''glassy-eyed'' and his expression changed. ''He said, 'Do you ever think you're lucky I didn't kill you?'.'' she recounted.

She said Sica came close to her with a nail file and said: ''I could kill you right now.''

''He looked gleeful, like this was arousing,'' she said. She told the court she was starting to see ''both sides'' of her friend's personality.

''There's the soft, supportive, protective side, then there's the other side that's more venomous,'' she said. ''Max will either adore or despise you. If he despised you, you were going to be in trouble.''

After the pair met up at the Everton Park Hotel in 2007, Bowman said Sica told her: ''If I ever find out you're talking to the detectives, I'll take you for a little drive.''

Defence counsel Sam Di Carlo said Bowman had worked with police for four years under the guise of writing the book, and that her witness statement resembled a Mills and Boon.

The hearing continues.

COMMITTAL WEDNESDAY 22ND SEPT

Singh murder accused Max Sica threatened kill spree and police HQ attack, court told
Jasmin Lill From: The Courier-Mail September 22, 2010 11:23PM

ALLEGED triple murderer Max Sica boasted he would blow up Queensland Police headquarters and go on a killing spree, slaying more people than the man responsible for the Port Arthur massacre, a court heard yesterday.

The Singh siblings Neelma, 24, Kunal, 18, and Sidhi, 12, were killed in their home at Bridgeman Downs on Brisbane's northside in April 2003.

Sica, 40, is in custody facing a committal hearing in the Brisbane Magistrate's Court.

His friend Andrea Louise Bowman told the court Sica had spoken to her in the aftermath of the deaths.

"He said, 'I'm going to be done for the murders and when I do, I'm going to blow up the Roma St police headquarters','' she said.

Bowman claimed Sica said he would go on a killing spree, killing more people than the man responsible for the Port Arthur massacre, Martin Bryant, but wouldn't be dumb enough to get caught for it.

"He gets a lot of fan mail in prison,'' Sica allegedly said of Bryant.

Bowman said she also spoke to Sica about a news story where the Singh family had produced a letter from Kunal "beyond the grave" where he "wrote" to his murderer.

"Max scoffed and said, 'why didn't I get one then?''' Bowman said.

She and Sica hypothesised about how the murders had occurred, and Sica said he was on to "the real killer".

"He said, 'I'm going to find them, I'm doing my own investigation'."

The court heard Sica also told Bowman how he'd discovered the three siblings dead in the spa.

Sica told her he'd gone to the house to take them to the movies but when no-one answered, he went inside.

Bowman said Sica told her how he turned off the running tap of the spa, and used a stick to lift blankets off it before a hand popped out.

"I knew it was Sidhi's because it was small,'' Sica allegedly told Bowman.

She said Sica also told her about finding girlfriend Neelma, who appeared to have a gunshot wound in her chest.

Bowman said Sica had told her the siblings' father Vijay was a violent man, and that Neelma was planning to leave as soon as she came into some money.

She claimed Sica said "anyway, they're better off dead".

Bowman also said Sica told her he'd done "all my crying" in the first three days after the siblings were discovered.

The hearing continues.
_______________________________________________________________

Ms Bowman also ALLEGES in court that, Max told her he had a HIT LIST and that she (Bowman) was on THE TOP of this list. BUT it appears she continued seeing him many, many times after.

COMMITTAL TUESDAY 21 SEPTEMBER

Singh murders: cop quizzed over text message
September 22, 2010 - 12:00AM

A police officer allegedly forwarded a text message from the mobile phone of a dead woman to his private phone without logging it in police investigation records, a Brisbane court has heard.

Neelma Singh, 24, and her siblings Kunal, 18, and Sidhi, 12, were found dead in the spa at their family's Bridgeman Downs home on Brisbane's northside on April 22, 2003.

Max Sica, who was Neelma's boyfriend in the months before her death, is facing three charges of murder over the deaths and has been in custody since December 2008.

His committal hearing resumed in the Brisbane Magistrates Court yesterday.

The court was told Neelma sent an angry SMS message to a man by the name of Mr Lala saying: "I heard you met Max this week, before you accuse me, get your story straight. You have no right to say what you did".

This afternoon, Sica's defence lawyer Sam Di Carlo asked investigator Detective Senior Sergeant Andrew Massingham why, according to phone records, a police officer involved in the investigation, Detective Senior Constable Philip Heery, had sent the message to his own personal phone in November 2003.

"He was not a forensic officer," Mr Di Carlo said.

Det Sen Sgt Massingham said he did not consider it unusual and was not aware of any reasons for this action.

Mr Di Carlo said the action had not been noted in formal police records.

The court heard that on other occasions, Det Sen Const Heery and other officers had followed "proper procedure" and videotaped and tape-recorded their dealings with the mobile phone in question.

Earlier today, Neelma's Fijian former boyfriend, Jasveer Singh, 27, an accountant who worked for her father's automotive business in Fiji, gave evidence.

The court heard Mr Singh and Neelma had had a sexual relationship and had discussed getting married.

Mr Singh said he had phoned his girlfriend in December 2002 to wish her a happy birthday and, after a short conversation, she said she would phone him back because she was busy.

The court heard that Mr Singh called her five more times that day, but the phone connections dropped out or she didn't answer.

Mr Singh said he received a "polite" phone call, "not aggressive in nature", from Sica telling him that Neelma didn't want to talk to him and revealing his own relationship with Neelma.

"How did this make you feel?" Mr Di Carlo asked.

Mr Singh said: "If she was happy with Max, it was better for me to back out."

Mr Singh and other employees were with Neelma's parents, Shirley and Vijay Singh, in Fiji at about eight (local time) on the night they heard that three bodies had been found at their Brisbane home.

Jasveer Singh told the court he received a phone call about shots fired in Brisbane, but did not have specific recollections of it.
Asked if he had any Fijian friends who had been to Australia or if police had asked him about Neelma cheating on him, or whether officers had ever said they were investigating him as a suspect, he said: "No".
Mr Di Carlo told the court he was not suggesting Jasveer Singh was a suspect, but wanted to know if police had explored this possibility.
The court also heard a recording of a threatening message left on the telephone answering machine of Shirley and Vijay Singh's Brisbane home.
The speaker, a native Fijian, said: "I know where your family lives, Vijay, you f... with my family, I will f... with yours ... I'm going to rape your wife and daughters."
The committal hearing continues tomorrow.

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Neelma Singh's ex-boyfriend tells how he 'backed out' of relationship
From: AAP September 21, 2010 4:36PM

THE Fijian former boyfriend of a murdered Brisbane woman has told a court he thought it better to "back out" of their relationship if she'd found happiness with another man.

Neelma Singh, 24, and her siblings Kunal, 18, and Sidhi, 12, were found dead in the spa at their family's Bridgeman Downs home on Brisbane's northside on April 22, 2003.

Max Sica, who was Neelma's boyfriend in the months before her death, is facing three charges of murder over the deaths and has been in custody since December 2008.

His committal hearing resumed in the Brisbane Magistrates Court on Monday after a 10-week adjournment.

Neelma's Fijian former boyfriend, Jasveer Singh, 27, an accountant who worked for her father's automotive business in Fiji, has travelled from his homeland to give evidence at the hearing.

The trip is his first visit to Australia.

The court heard Mr Singh and Neelma had had a sexual relationship and had discussed getting married.

Sica's defence counsel, Sam Di Carlo, asked Mr Singh what he knew about a man called Max.

Mr Singh told the court Neelma had said he was just a friend who was good with computers and had a sports car.

"She never spoke ill of him," he told the court.

Mr Di Carlo asked Mr Singh about phone calls between him and Neelma on December 29, 2002, and a call from Sica.

Mr Singh said he had phoned his girlfriend to wish her a happy birthday and, after a short conversation, she said she would phone him back because she was busy.

"She was happy I called," he said.

The court heard that Mr Singh called her five more times that day, but the phone connections dropped out or she didn't answer.

Mr Singh said he received a "polite" phone call "not aggressive in nature" from Sica telling him that Neelma didn't want to talk to him and revealing his own relationship with Neelma.

"How did this make you feel? ... You were going to marry this girl," Mr Di Carlo asked Jasveer.

Mr Singh said: "If she was happy with Max, it was better for me to back out".

Mr Singh and other employees were with Neelma's parents, Shirley and Vijay Singh, in Fiji at about 8pm (local time), on the night they heard that three bodies had been found at their Brisbane home.

Jasveer Singh told the court he received a phone call about shots fired in Brisbane but did not have specific recollections.

He said there was lots of crying and the Singhs hastily made arrangements to return to Australia.

Asked if he had any Fijian friends who had been to Australia or if police had asked him about Neelma cheating on him, or whether officers had ever said they were investigating him as a suspect, he said: "No".

Mr Di Carlo told the court he was not suggesting Jasveer Singh was a suspect, but wanted to know if police had explored this possibility.

Earlier today, the court heard a recording of a threatening message left on the telephone answering machine of Shirley and Vijay Singh's Brisbane home.

The speaker, a native Fijian, said: "I know where your family lives, Vijay, you f... with my family, I will f... with your's ... I'm going to rape your wife and daughters".

The committal hearing continues.

COMMENT MADE .................................

Not too sure. (easiest to say). But I think this guy did it and he / his friend started this blog to create a smokescreen.

To you anonymous, this is only part of the comment made by you. Did not put the rest because it is only a personal attack, with hate and malice. First of all Max nor a friend of his started this blog. Max is in jail and has no access to a computer so you should know that if you would just use some intelligence. This blog only states facts which have come out at the committal hearing so far. Some have been printed in the newspapers and other facts were never printed, so they are here for all to read.
Then what you said about no injuries on his body........is that something you know for a fact? In my opinion it only furthermore shows his innocence, then of course you are entitled to yours. In the meantime you are always welcome to just read on.

COMMITTAL HEARING STARTS AGAIN

Sica defence tells court of angry SMS from Neelma Singh to another man before her death

Petrina Berry From: The Courier-Mail September 20, 2010 8:00PM

AN acrimonious message was sent by Neelma Singh to a man the night before she and her siblings were killed in their Brisbane home, a court has heard.
Neelma, 24, and siblings Kunal, 18, and Sidhi, 12, were found dead in their Bridgeman Downs home, on Brisbane's northside, in April 2003.

Max Sica, Neelma's former boyfriend, is facing three charges of murder over the deaths. His committal hearing resumed in the Brisbane Magistrates Court yesterday after a 10-week adjournment.

Sica's defence counsel, Sam Di Carlo, told the court Neelma sent an angry SMS message to a man by the name of Mr Lala, saying: "Before you accuse me, get your story straight. You have no right to say what you did".

"Then there is a message from him (Mr Lala) the following morning, at 9.55am, which states: 'Can you meet me at the park behind my old house at 10.30am'," Mr Di Carlo said.

"This was almost the last contact, other than with Max Sica, with a person who appears she (Neelma) had some acrimony with in respect of bad-mouthing her around the place and he wants to meet her at 10.30. In the meantime she's dead."

Mr Di Carlo asked investigator Detective Senior Sergeant Andrew Massingham what inquiries police had made into Mr Lala.

Det Sen Sgt Massingham said statements from Mr Lala and his parents were taken and police understood he was at a wedding in bayside Sandgate the night before the Singhs were found dead.

Mr Di Carlo asked what other investigations were conducted into Mr Lala, including finding where he was at the time he replied to Neelma's text message the following morning. Det Sen Sgt Massingham said further inquiries would have been made.

"That inquiry (which mobile tower the message came from) would have been made by the intel (intelligence) office at this time. I don't have any recollection as to which tower it may or may not have bounced off," he said.

Mr Di Carlo told the court: "You (police) may not have been interested in anyone else but Max (Sica)."

Earlier in the day, the court heard an accusation that the children's mother, Shirley Singh, was having an affair with a younger man.

Psychic reader Helen Hextall told the court about the many conversations she had with Ms Singh before the murders.

She said Ms Singh had spoken of her affair with an Australian man 10 years her junior.

"She asked me if I thought he was a player," Ms Hextall said.

The hearing resumes on Tuesday.

BLOW TO CROWN CASE

For five and a half years police have worked on the Singh murders. This operation has been described as the most complex and largest investigation in QLD history.

On Monday 21/04/03 Max went and picked up his two children, (12 and 5 yrs of age) and took them to Mcdonalds for breakfast. They went through the drive through between 7.15-7.30am, before going to Ironbark Gully Park. The police siezed camera surveillence from Mcdonalds, within two days from the inside of the restaurant. At 7.05am a man, woman, girl and boy entered the restaurant. They are the very first customers. The man appears to have black hair and looks similar to Max. The man is wearing shorts, a white t-shirt, sandals and watch on his wrist. The young boy has a healthy built and the young girl has long hair reaching below her shoulders, with a bandana on her head. The police believe that this footage was of Max and his children. "Watch" was a main part of the investigation. I guess they thought what any normal person would do, perhaps Max got rid of the watch or got it repaired because he had DNA, BLOOD OR EVIDENCE of water from the spa bath or any other forensic material in it. They even questioned members of the family about it during the CMC hearing in 2006.

Today, a witness, a mother identified the children on the footage as not hers. Max`s daughter who was five at the time had short, ear length (bob)style hair cut. She never wore a bandana. Her record of interview with police on the 23rd of April 2003 shows her hairstyle. The male in the footage appears fuller (chubbier) than Max. The ex-wife couldnt identify Max or her son on the footage either. It doesnt matter to the police what Max or his family has said in their record of interviews. Even Max`s family knew that the footage was not of Max and the children.

As seen on SBS on (every family`s nightmare) last week, its clear that the qld police has chosen the "normative" method rather than the eliminative. They made up their mind from the word go (22/04/03 when Max`s home was described as a secondary crime scene) that Max was responsible for the murders and spent six years building the case around him. (there is evidence of witnesses including a major witness for the crown case, who is yet to come to build up more circumstantial evidence for the investigation, after Max had been charged for the murders in late 2008). But we must give credit to the QLD police because they did use the eliminative method in the end, only to eliminate everyone else and focus their entire cirumstantial evidence on Max Sica. Amazing how they never found any shred of DNA, BLOOD, or any other form of evidence against Max, despite his items (from the Sica house) being siezed on the early hours of the 23rd of April 03, prior to which Max had spent roughly 18 hours in police custody.

The police even had the chance to corrobrate Max`s items of clothing over the weekend, but never even bothered to ask anybody what Max had been wearing on days prior to the discovery.

Neelma`s ex boyfriend (who also exchanged sms messages between Sunday and Monday morning with Neelma) also said he was in bed between 12 and 630am. Police chose to believe him (and his family) yet claim they used the eliminative system from the start, trying to keep an "open mind". They never showed anybody the vehicle or the photoboard of her ex boyfriend or anyone else as has been done to Max. They never believed Max or his family when they individualy testified (while Max was being interviewed by the police just after the discovery of the bodies) to max being asleep at home. This is despite Max`s brother telling them that he checked on Max that night to discuss something with him and saw that he was in bed asleep.(he did this after he had dropped off a family friend back to her house after she had spent the night with him at the Sica residence) This happened after midnight on the 20th of April 03 `the night the police allege the murders had occured'. There are so many examples that can be given about the crime case that really does not make much sense. Maybe thats why they dont want to tell the defence what their case actually is, ie: what they are alleging occured on the night of the "DEATHS".

On one hand, its a premeditated approach, on the other (a spur of the moment), (a crime of passion) approach. They have circumstantial theories to back both avenues up. Its clear to even a blind person that the police have used a normative approach in this investigation. They dont care if Max is innocent, for them who better than an ex criminal, especially one that was involved in burning down a police station???. They just want their promotion, and to keep a face in front of society. They all seem to have forgotten the pledge they took of honesty and integrity, and the faith that the public have in them for truth and justice.

I guess unless you feel the entire weight of the injustice from these very people in whom you place your trust in, you will never know what it means to feel "EVERY FAMILY`S NIGHTMARE". Please do watch for the sex charges to go to trial as the injustice in that case and the normitive way in which the police formed their crown case against Max will be exposed with CRUTIAL evidence which the police would have known if they ever bothered to ask any members of the family, and really it would have helped the crown in their case as at that time none of the Sica family members knew the details about the allegation.

I bet you anything that when the crowns major witness Mrs Bowman, is called to testify, that at least one member of the media will be present to report on it.

As for us we believe in a higher authority beyond this world, we believe in the one and only true God to whom we pray for justice in this matter for the sakes of Neelma, Kunal, Sidhi and Max.

INVESTIGATOR CREEPED OUT BY SICA

Investigator 'creeped out' by Sica AMELIA BENTLEY
May 5, 2010 - 6:18AM

Accused killer Max Sica allegedly held his victim's hand as she lay dead in a spa bath, a Brisbane court has heard.

In the continuation of a committal hearing for Mr Sica, accused of the brutal slaying of his on-and-off girlfriend Neelma, 24, her 18-year-old brother Kunal and 12-year-sister Sidhi Singh seven years ago, Brisbane Magistrates Court yesterday heard evidence from a private investigator involved in the murder inquiry.

Brenda Sanche, who met with Mr Sica several times after the suburban killings, told detectives investigating the murders she became "creeped out" by Mr Sica who she believed was "obsessed" with the exact time of the Singhs' deaths and why their bodies were dumped in a hot spa bath.

Sica case in turmoil as lawyer demands cash
Sica 'forced into small socks'

Ms Sanche, who was not present in court but whose evidence was played via a recorded interview with police, said Mr Sica told her how he discovered the bodies of the Singhs when he let himself in to their home through an open garage door in April 2003.

He told her how, after seeing the bodies in the spa, he had held Neelma's hand before emergency services arrived at the crime scene in Grass Tree Close, Bridgeman Downs, in Brisbane's north.

Ms Sanche said she found that piece of information "really weird" and said she "thought he was lying" about parts of his story after she studied his body language.

After having coffee with Mr Sica several times in the months following the killings, Ms Sanche said she was "creeped out".

"I was feeling kinda creeped out about Max. Just things he said ... every conversation we had he wanted to know the time of death ... he was obsessed with the time of death," she said.

Mr Sica also was fixated on the security system installed at the Singhs' home, telling Ms Sanche the system had "laser beams" which could detect people in the home.

He also continually spoke about how the bodies had been left in hot water, saying: "Everybody knows it's cold water that gets rid of evidence".

But Ms Sanche said she did not think Mr Sica believed that statement, saying she thought he would have known it was hot water rather than cold which could wash away evidence.

Ms Sanche said an associate named Greg had told her Mr Sica had "looked into my eyes and said he didn't do this" and Greg believed him.

"He's telling me to believe him, but things just didn't make sense in my head," she said.

Following a five-and-a-half-year investigation into the Singh murders, Mr Sica was arrested and charged the murders of the Singh siblings.

The 40-year-old father of three from Stafford Heights, in Brisbane's north, denies the charges.

Since his arrest in November 2008 and following two failed applications for bail, Mr Sica has been in jail on remand awaiting the outcome of a trial.

The committal hearing, in which Magistrate Brian Hine will determine if there is enough evidence for the case to proceed to trial, continues today.


OBSESSED WITH SINGH`S TIME OF DEATH AND WHY BODIES WERE DUMPED IN HOT SPA BATH.... Max Sica was devestated at finding Neelma, Kunal and Sidhi dead in a spa. He as much as anyone wanted to know who did this. The police when interviewing him the first time had asked him who he thought had done it, he replied how would i know, but if i did, pray i dont get to them first. He then told the investigating officer i did not do this if that`s what your thinking. Then he soon came to realize that he was their prime suspect.

As for Ms Sanche, the so called investigator, she was on her first job when she met Max and was an understudy for the actual real investigator, Greg, the person she says was an associate. Ms Sanche at that stage had no qualifications whatsoever to be an investigator let alone analysing someones body language. But like everything else about this case, each and all are entitled to have their say about what they assume, what they allege and what they then acutally know.

BLEACHED FEET ARTICLE

Bleached feet used in murder investigation
AMELIA BENTLEY April 30, 2010

Police officers dipped their feet in bleach solutions and walked on carpet samples while investigating the murders of the Singh siblings at their north Brisbane home seven years ago, a court has been told.

Former flight attendant Neelma, 24, student Kunal, 18 and 12-year-old Sidhi Singh were found slain in their Bridgeman Downs home in April 2003, while their parents were away in Fiji.

Neelma's on-and-off boyfriend, former neighbour Max Sica, now 40, was charged with their murders in late 2008 following a five year investigation into the grisly killings.
------------------------
Sica 'forced into small socks'
------------------------
Yesterday during Mr Sica's committal hearing, the Brisbane Magistrates Court was told the police experiment was done in order to mimic the Singhs' killer, who police allege left bleach-stained foot prints on carpet at the murder scene.

Police have alleged Mr Sica used bleach to clean part of the Singhs' home after he strangled Neelma, bashed and then drowned Kunal and bludgeoned Sidhi to death.

Yesterday afternoon, defence barrister Sam Di Carlo questioned scientist Richard Mattner, who discovered bleach traces on several items taken from the Singhs home following the discovery of the siblings' bodies.

Mr Mattner said he remembered police officers involved in the investigation soaked their feet in buckets of bleach solutions and walked up and down carpets in order to re-create footprints found at the murder scene.

"Initially, it was hoped to simulate footprints on carpet. It was bare feet ... I believe it was quite unsuccessful," he said.

Mr Mattner said he remembered police were "disappointed with the results" because they had been unable to make a path of footprints like the ones discovered at the Grass Tree Close home.

"I suggested a way to produce more footprints was to put a pair of socks on," he said.

Mr Mattner denied police pressured him to make particular findings about footprints in bleach on carpet.

But he said it was true he emailed a colleague in July 2003 regarding the Singh murders investigation, which said: "The detectives say the evidence is critical since they don't have much to hang their hats on".

Mr Mattner said he had been referring to "confirmatory tests" to double-check his work.

"This was an important case, clearly," he said.

Carpet from vehicles used by Mr Sica around the time of the killings was also tested for bleach traces, Mr Mattner said.

There were areas which, to the naked eye, appeared as though bleach had come in contact.

But back at his laboratory, Mr Mattner said he found no evidence of bleach product.

The committal hearing, which began in August last year and was adjourned several times before resuming earlier this month, continues today.


YES AND THIS PROVES WHAT? JUST MORE ASSUMPTIONS, ALLEGATIONS AND INUENDO`S

AMAZING BUT TRUE

Yesterday at the committal hearing an amazing thing was said, it was said that after seven yrs, police had only just now sent Max Sica`s clothes and socks to be tested for bleach. First of all i really cant believe it, I cant believe they took seven yrs to do it, and i cant believe they are just taking samples now. What is happening? Something is definately not right.
Six days to discover footprints, seven years to take bleach samples, garden fork that allegedly was used to kill Singh children found after five days when on the day of the discovery of the bodies, there had been more than thirty officers and forensic people through the Singh home to search in every corner.
In a case as huge as this and with a man fighting for the truth and his freedom, where is the justice? As soon as the committal is finished, there will be some facts posted to this blog. It all sounds astounding, unbelievable but unfortunately everything that has been happening in this case and to Max Sica is all too true.

STAY TUNED

How does a person go from being a witness, to a prime suspect within less than 24 hours? Bryne Paton, the investigation coordinator has given his testimony and his explanation for it, along with the lead detective Mr Joseph Vincent Zitny. Stay tuned for the next update.........it'll really make u think.


Answer to comment.... No resemblence between two whatsoever, thats why you have not heard any comment on it.

COMMON SENSE

Before reading the statement made below consider two facts:
1. The girl in question up until oct 2008 was a virgin. This proved by the states own doctors.
2. Police had max under surveillance for five yrs, so either max was the best at evading more than 47 police officers or they point blanked lied.
Use your brains. If you believe that max was the best then sack the government and police for being so incompetent.
If you believe in the latter that police lied, (corrupted and perverted justice) then sack the government and police and worry for your future and that of your children.



PIECE OF A PARTIAL STATMENT

ALLEGATIONS. The word itself says it all. An "allegation" is what a person SAYS happened, but not what really happened. Thats why a number of people from the public is quick to jump at and decide a persons guilt from these "so-called" allegations, because to any ordinary person, when the police lay charges against someone, they immediately trust and believe that the police have fully investigated the matter and that they (police) are members of the law that can be trusted without question.

It is so unfortunate that we are unable to bring out the truth about the complainant child's allegations, as we do not want to give the child a chance to change her stories again. That's right, again. The child first told everyone that the offences would occur while people would be in the house, sometimes up to 5 other people, and that it would take place in all the rooms of the Sica residence, however when confronted by someone in front of two other witnesses, (one of which was the complainant child's mother) the child changed her stories. Initially she had said that the offences would occur in maxs room, however when this person told her that max had his room under video surveillance, she quickly said that it never happened in maxs room. The person then told her that all the other rooms of the house was under audio surveillance and that they'd be able to hear things. She then turned around and said that they never spoke about it, to which the person got frustrated and asked her, if they used sign language.

The police themselves who was investigating, following and surveilling Max (since 2003 for the triple murders with the states finest officers assigned to the case )admitted that there was no evidence to suggest that these offences had occurred. The child also told members of her family, the sica family and the family children that her friend (chloe-real names ommitted for legal issues) was drugged, raped and beaten by her friends mother's boyfriend and that she was pregnant. This story started in feb/march of 2008, yet some 6 months later when questioned by police, Chloe, the friend of the complainant child told the police that it never really happened and that it was all a DREAM that she had. Regarding the assault allegations, nothing came out of it as the police said that there had been "alibi witnesses".

Amazing how the police never once questioned any members of the sica family, including max's wife and children from the family. This is despite the fact that carlo sica, max's father, (the person who informed the police about the disclosures that the complainant child had made) AND ALSO A CROWN WITNESS told the police that max's partner was always with max everyday, like a leech. The complainant child herself told the police that after and before some of these offences, they had met up with other people in the family, including maxs partner. I wonder why they didn't even bother to go and confirm whether or not that really was the case.

It's just so unfortunate that we are unable to give examples as this will give the child a chance to change her stories once more.. Here's another one. The child started high school in 2008, she had a friend in primary school that she used to call her ''sister'' and her other half, someone that she knew for 3 years. She never once told her best friend about any of these allegations, yet opened up to more than 5 girls that she only knew for less than 6 months. The funny part is, those other girls themselves said they find it difficult to believe the complainant child as she has a habit of telling lies about everything and everyone. The police also knows that the child and her friends lied about a call that they alleged was made by max sica to the complainant child during school hours in november 2008, (shortly after max was granted bail over the sex charges) which they claim to have lasted over 30 mins. The phone records showed that the child did not recieve any such call and neither did her friends, and we all know that phone records don't lie.
Here's a real mind boggler........the complianant child alleged that an offence occurred in 2007, 5 days after her friend kim's birthday. (real names not provided due to legal reasons) kim, told the police herself that she did know the complainant child until 2008, when they started high school together. Even if u give the child the benefit of the doubt and say that it could have occured 5 days after her friends kim's birthday in 2008, things do not add up, as during that day in 2008, (which equates to be a tuesday) the complainant child's mother watched her daughter at her house as she was no longer working weekdays by then. It's a real pity that the complainant child's mother has not read the details of the allegations, because if she did, she herself would realise that her daughter has lied immensely.

The police did not take the child for a medical examination until after 6 weeks, after constant pressure from maxs parents, the child was taken to a medical center for examination by a gp. The gp told the court under cross examiantion in commital, that she did NOT examine the child's hymen at all after speaking to the sexual assault unit over the phone who advised her not to carry out the examination. She only took a specimen to check for bacteria culture and to look for urine infection. She HERSELF, from her own mouth told the court that she never once said that the child was not a virgin, as she did not examine her for that. however, when the complainant child went to the specialist, she told her that the other gp had said that she was definetely not a virgin. Even the mother of the complainant child said that the doctor said that "she thought that penetration had occurred", however the gp said that she never said that. how could she, when she did not examine the girls hymen??? even the specialist said that the childs hymen was fully intact, thick, and without any injury or abnormalities. (which is normally present in sexually active girls, especially if sex is occurring at least once a fortnight for 4 years) this piece of evidence is mind boggling too, especially if u consider the fact that the child herself told the police that "it hurt" her so bad on nearly every occasion they had sex and that sometimes it hurt her for days after as well, to the point where she would "whimper" and "cry" after urinating............wierd isn't it?

The most disgusting fact about the police is that they did not even bother to question anybody at all. don't they have a duty of care towards children?? How come they never questioned max's daughter, niece, son, and partner's brother??? (all of whom are ALIBI WITNESSES), the police would have known this if they had bothered to investigate everything properly. What if max had been molesting other children in the family??? what would the police say if this had turned out to be the case? where does their duty of care lie....I wonder. They did not attempt to question max's partner until the day they charged max with the allegations. After max was arrested and taken away by police, 2 female officers approached his partner and asked if she was willing to talk to the police, naturally, anybody that has common sense will know (and ask any lawyer) that once a person is charged, it is futile for ALIBI witnesses to talk to the police. The sadest part is, max's wife was always willing to talk to police if they had approached her, prior to arresting max. and it would have been better for the police case, as at that time the defense did not know the details of the allegations. If the police had simply asked a question such as "do u recall the night that ............................ and ...................?" (in due time all the evidence of the defense will fill in the gaps) that would have been enough to find out the truth. They did it in the complainant child's friends' case, i wonder why they didnt do that in max's. But i must give the police credit for "attempting" to talk to max's wife's younger brother. They went to the wrong address......this is ironic as shiv's (max's wife) parents have always rented, and tenancy information is readily available to police.

This case was the reason why the police ended up jumping the gun and charging max with triple murder. Max got charged with the sex allegations in late october, got bail 2 weeks later in mid of november, and arrested with triple murder a week after he got married in december to his partner for 5 years. The police knew that the child had lied but it was too late for them, as they couldn't have max get off the sex charges as it would prove to the public just how badly the police wanted him for the murders.
The lead detectives in the sex case was liasing with the lead detectives (mr zitny, homicide squad) from the murder investigation. Ironic part is, that mr zitny was working for the child protection unit in pine rivers that same year. This is the officer who denied under oath that max was a prime suspect in the triple murder. He had said that max was only ever a "person of interest" and that he didn't become the prime suspect in the killings until an year later, which was disproved with documentation which showed that max was a prime suspect in the killings within less than 12 hours of the discovery of the bodies. This is one of the reasons why max's family is fighting for max's bail so strongly, because they all were told by many lawyers to expect an arrest for the murders as the police will not want to look stupid in front of the public, and this way they could get him for one or the other set of charges. oh, did i forget to mention that 2 of the 20 sex charges alones carries 2 life sentences, which means, if convicted, max would be spending a minimum of 20 to 30 years behind prison? Just wait and see, the sex trial will occur early next year before the complainant child reaches the age of 16 and is able to be cross examined as an adult. It is a real pity that the police didnt do their job properly, as once the trial begins, they will look like real fools, especially when the alibi witnesses for the days in question are presented. Not only that, the alibi witnesses have got evidence to back up their witness testimonies, eg phone records, bank statements, photos, videos, passports, school records, POLICE records and many more will prove the extent to which the complainant child has lied and the lack of proper police investigation in this matter.

The police did not speak to many of the crown witnesses( child's friends, etc) until after max was arrested with the allegations. I pray that anyone that has commonsense can now understand the legal politics which surrounds the murder charges, moreso, due to the fact that police shot themselves in the foot when they jumped the gun and charged max with the murders when they realised that the child's story didnt add up........maybe thats why they didnt even bother to question any of the sica family members, because they knew that then, they (the police) will not be able to say in the end that they knew both sides of the story.
The police have always tried to taint max's name through trial by media, and what better opportunity then when a child is involved? please do not take our word for it, just wait until the trial starts and when the defense produces it's evidence. the family will naturally then come out to the media with the entire evidence, including a really long list of alibi witnesses, most of which are children. Think about it, the police was thorough in Chloe`s case and questioned people (from suspects side) to establish the childs creditability. I wonder why they never did that in max SICA`S CASE. They did not attempt to question the defences main alibi witnesses (which is common police practice) until after Max got charged.

Anyone that reads this, if u really are a person of truth and integrity, please pray that god shows the truth in this matter for both the sake of the complainant child (someone who max and shiv treated as if their own child) and for max, Amen. Mark my words, max will get vindicated by god, who knows and sees all, and if this does not come to pass, u can spit on our faces. Thats how much evidence the defense has, and guess what, it's really not evidence at all, its the TRUTH. and if it wasnt, then everyone apart from the complainant child is telling the truth, including people who don't know max personally but will be able to provide alibi witness testimony.

Watch the trial it will be very very enlighting and entertaining (because a circus will be made out of the legal system) and it will prove the many fundamental flaws in the QLD governement and QLD police system which has been seen from the Fitzgerald Inquiry right up until today. For example, the Graham Stafford case, Lindy Chamberlain case, Millard case just to name a few. Now Max Sica, who is going to be the man for this century.

ALLEGED SEX OFFENCE CHARGES

Man charged with rape of child
Posted Fri Apr 9, 2010 1:43pm AEST

Brisbane man Massimo "Max" Sica has been indicted on 20 child sex charges in the District Court.

The charges include one count of maintaining a sexual relationship with a girl under 16 years, two counts of rape, six counts of unlawful carnal knowledge with a child and nine counts of indecent dealing with a child.

It is alleged the girl was aged between 9 and 13 at the time of the offences, between 2004 and 2008.

The matter has been adjourned until May 10 in the Brisbane District Court.

TMC AND DOUSER...............................
This is the latest newspaper article about Max Sica and the alleged sex offence charges.

If anyone of you was at the committal regarding these alleged sex charges then you must have also heard this................

The girl who is making the accusations against Max Sica says that she has had full on intercourse with him (a fully grown adult) at least once a week or once a fortnight from the age of 9 till the age of 13. She alleges it started in 2004 and continued until 2008. When police questioned her the first time about these so called allegations, she said that since her friend was telling her that her stepfather was molesting her, she wanted to know more and be closer to her so she made up a story that she was molested too, and since Max Sica was known because of all the publicity on him, she used his name and made it all up.

Police later questioned her and she then said that it was true, that Max Sica had sex with her for at least four years and regularly.

A medical examination was done on this girl and this is what was found:
Her hymen if fully intact, no scaring, no trauma, no tearing. She is a virgin.

Im not an expert but i am a woman and there is no way on earth you could still be like that if you have had sex with a fully grown man and you a child for all those years and on many, many occassions. This is just what the medical examination shows. There is so much other evidence that i cannot mention now because of pending legal issues.

Another thing is this.... Max Sica has been under police surveillence since the murders occurred in 2003. This was also shown to be true at the committal for the Singh murders. House was fully bugged, phones were tapped, cars were bugged, gps surveillance was used and he was followed around by undercover police. I do not think that police would know such a thing and not do anything about it. This is why Max Sica was then charged with the Singh murders on the 30th of December 2008. Nearly six years after. Nothing had changed, no new evidence had come out or was made available, no smoking gun, no miracle witness.

You dont have to believe me if i say he did not and would never ever harm a child in this way or anyother way. The FACTS are all out in the open. By the way, the other girl who was saying that her stepfather was molesting her etc,,,, she told police it was not true and that was the end of that. JUSTICE? Not if your name happens to be Massimo Sica.

COMMENT MADE.....

speakupnbeheardJuly 25, 2012 12:11 PM

We had a situation where my partner was accused of molesting his own daughter (aged 4 at the time) after his recent marital breakup. The child is a slow developer and her speech at that stage was very limited. We would see the child on a fortnightly basis with bruises and telling us stories* and games* of her being "hurt". It got to a point where this could no longer be ignored. My partner was advised to take her to the juvenile department of the police dept; they questioned and watched as father and child related to one another. The mother stormed into the police dept with her solicitor (straight from work after being notified her child was suspected of being molested)and was told to take the child to hospital for an examination. This did not occur. Mother waited 3 days later, then went to her normal GP where no vaginal examinations occurred, and the child was able to CLEARLY state that her father had "hurt" her. Mother and doctor gave her a big hug and told her that she was a good girl. When DOCS spoke with the child, where the child once again gave her spiel (exact same words she gave to the doctor), they too gave her a big cuddle and told her she was a good girl. For a little girl craving for love and attention, she was taught that if she said these words, she would get cuddles and kisses. We had to have supervised visits for approx. 6mths. DOCS wanted my partner to go to pedophile group meetings; this disgusted him and he refused. They threatened that if he didn't, he wouldn't be allowed to see his daughter at all, and that it would hurt his case; he still refused to go - he was not a pedophile - and being put into a room with pedophiles would have riled him - and for him to have to listen to what they said would have outraged him even more. It wasn't until just before court that the child was interviewed by a counsellor; once the child gave the spiel(by rote)she said "Do you like my pretty necklace it's a butterfly?" (both sentences) all in the one breath, the counsellor's alarm bells rang. It cost us over $62,000 to clear my partners name through the court system and to be able to see his daughter without supervision. The person doing the "hurting" fled to NZ when we went to the police in the first instance. Police were wanting to question him but never got the chance. 7 years on - we know that the mother had taught the child what to say - we also know that her mother had an inkling of what was going on but too scared to say - plus - it was a good way to "get back" at her husband. DOCS wanted my partners head on a platter. Why would the so-called pedophile take a child to the police to tell them she is being molested?!! We have life-inexperienced school kids making detrimental life altering decisions (about us) in our justice systems. Also....the media....the justice system....just want someone to blame. It makes a good story, and it makes our politicians look good....I'm sorry, but that is a high price for us innocent to pay.

TO CLEAR SOME POINTS FOR YOU ANONYMOUS ONE

First of all please decide if Neelma was scared of Max or in love with Max. If Neelma was scared of Max she would not let him in dont you think? There would actually be a sign of forced entry.

DNA on cigarette butts, well as you must know, Max was there on many occassions, he smoked in the garage, around the house etc and he smoked there even before the 13th, 15th, 17th and on the actual day 22nd of April.

Yes there was a text message sent by Neelma to Max at 857pm Easter Sunday night but there were also these calls directly from police logs................................
ARTICLE FROM BRISBANE TIMES 2nd SEPTEMBER 2009
Detective Zitny said after the text was sent(at 8.57pm)on the night of Easter Sunday, there was a call from the Sica home phone to the Singh's home phone - a call which lasted for two minutes and 35 seconds. Neelma then rang Sica's mobile phone for one second, which is followed by another 34-second call from Sica's to her mobile phone at 11.10pm.
When Max says that they decided not to see eachother that night, it is fully believable. Any person has to be judged with presumption of innocence.

No sign of forced entry.... That does not point a finger to anyone since any person would open the door to all the people they know. The Singh`s would have known a lot of people, also the mother`s massage business was conducted from the home and it is a point to be considered as even strangers were let in.

There are some conflicting statements of the time when Max arrived at the Singh house on that day, there are also statements saying that Max had taken his sister to a beautician at Stafford at that time, then passed by his house and then gone to drop off a video, all before he got to the Singh`s home. The tradie as you put it was spoken to before the discovery.

Neelma had spoken to Max on the Thursday and asked if he had pain killers for she had a sore arm, his father gave him some panadeine forte to take to her and they were found at the scene. But im sure you know that. As for the diary, i wonder about ALL the things that were written in it and when it went missing. There is also written evidence stating that Neelma was scared of her father and was also concerned for her siblings welfare.

Apart from some other objects taken, why would Max have taken a piece of jewellery he gave Neelma? If a person wanted it to look like a robbery, they would have taken lots of other things. It could be viewed as a setup.

As for you final comment, why mention some piece of clothing if you would have known what one was wearing? That to me is senseless. If one did, they would have said i dont know, did not take any notice, was not paying attention etc etc. or name the item of clothing as it was.

When Max saw the horrendous image in front of him, he could not believe what he was looking at, he held Neelma`s hand and saw everything and everyone in the spa, he was standing right over it.

To finish off it was said by the coroner that the time of death is estimated to be anywhere from three days to six hours prior to the discovery of the bodies.

Please do put a name to your thoughts, you dont need to hide behind an anonymous signiture. Even though i can understand how it could be easier for you. Nightmares are what Max and his family go through every day. If you think you know me, (which i doubt) why continue writing as anonymous? One answer i will give you, is that i do not have the need to deny or justify anything, as Massimo is an innocent person. It took them nearly seven years to enforce a circumstancial case which is based on innuendo`s, unfounded assumptions, and sway public opinion by using the media to their advantage. STILL they end up with what i dont even call a weak case but an absurd one. Breaking all the rules of human rights. Remember that a person is INNONCENT until proven GUILTY (we all want the real culprit/s not just an easy target)
An example of injustice is the story of Graham Stafford, all the so called evidence they had against him was later discredited and it was amazing as to how he was ever charged in the first place. Think about it....... whomever you are.