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.
Friday, February 19, 2010
Thursday, February 18, 2010
YES, POINTS OF INTEREST..........
Tristan SwanwickA SUPREME Court judge has described the Crown case againstaccused triple murderer Max Sica as"less than compelling".
Sica has been in custody sinceDecember 2008 when he was arrested for the murders of his former girlfriend Neelrna Singh, 24, and her siblings,Kunal, 18, and Sidhi, 12.
Justice Richard Chesterman, indismissing the ~ccused man's latest bid to be released on bail, said the only evidence capable of directly linking Sica to the 2003 murders was footprint impressions found at the crime scene." (However) it is not possible to say the extent! to which it might provide that link," he said in his written decision.
Justice Chesterrnan detailed evidence from Canadian policeman and expert in "footprint morphology"Robert Kennedy. Mr Kennedy had concluded that there was "strong support" for the theory that foot impressions found at the scene were made by Sica. However, under cross examination he changed his position by saying there was "support"for the theory, but not "strong support"."The footprints apart, the only evidence establishing the appellant's presence in the house on 20 April 2003 is circumstantial," JusticeChesterman said. "The most that can be said is that the Crown case is not without substance but is less than compelling."However Justice Chesterman, upholding the decision of the SupremeCourt in December to deny Sica bail, conceded that a proper assessment of the evidence could not be conducted until the completion of the committal hearing. Other evidence against Sica detailed by Justice Chesterman included:• Sica admitted visiting the Singhhouse on April 13, 15 and 17, but denied being present on April 20,when police believe the murder soccurred. • A text message to Sica found on Neelma's mobile phone suggested she expected him to visit on the night of the murders. • There was no sign of forced entry to the house. • Jewellery owned by Neelma, including an item given to her by Sica, had been stolen while other more valuable property was untouched. • Her diary was also taken. • A cigarette butt with Sica's DNA was found outside the rear door. • On the night after the killings, Sica activated a program to delete all data from his computer. Sica's committal hearing, which will determine if he will stand trial, is ongoing.
Justice Chesterman was scathing of defence lawyers' handling of the case, rejecting protests their client was "languishing in prison" and saying a six-month committal hearing was "unnecessary and wasteful".
(When police BELIEVE murders occurred being the key word. Plus they have statements from family members and others who saw him at home on thatEaster Sunday night)
(Max and Neelma also spoke via phone on that same Easter Sunday night at 11.10pm, txt message was sent at 8.57pm. Neelma was not feeling well that night and there is a statement of one of Kunal Singh`s friend saying that Kunal had told him not to come over that night because his sister was not well.)
(No sign of forced entry does not mean that Max was the only person they knew and would let in. They might have answered the door to someone whom they did not know or might have pretented to be in need of help so as to gain entry.)
(Not only Neelma`s jewellery was taken and why would Max have taken an item of jewellery that he had given her? A bloodied pillow was taken away from the scene of the crime and police did not even notice.)
(Neelma`s diary was taken, yes i wonder by whom and when it was taken.)
(Cigarette butts containing Max`s DNA were not only found outside the rear door but also in a make shift ashtray in the garage (along with butts which had Neelma`s DNA on them) and butts containing Max`s DNA were found near gutters and in grassaround the house. Max and Neelma use to smoke in the garage and outside the house.)
(As for the the program that was running on Max`s computer, it was a program called cyber scrub and anyone could have bought it or downloaded it from the internet. The police themselves have said that Max knew quite a bit about computers, well dont you think that if he wanted to get rid of whatever, he would have taken out the hard drive and smashed it to bits? For the only way of getting rid of data from your computer is by doing exactly that. As long as you have a hard drive, info can be retrieved. Even i know that and im not a computer expert of anykind. Police took the hard drive out and sent it to America and they have all the data that was on it.)
I would also like to add that police only theorize that the Singh children were killed on late Sunday night early Monday morning. Max had gone to pick up his kids at 7.15 am on Monday morning and they have proof of this. Also bone chilling screams that were heard at around 8.30pm Monday night and around 12 or 12.08am Tuesday morning have never been confirmed as not coming from the Singh house or from anywhere else. A Mr Paul Surri was adament he saw Sidhi Singh outside the front of her house on the Easter Monday morning, police tried to tell him that he must have been mistaken, but he insisted it was then. A man was seen at around 5.30 am Tuesday morning, two women taking a walk had seen him and when this man saw them coming, he apparently ran off towards the Singh house and jumped a fence. An identicate of this man was given to the police, i didnt see it on any newspaper or news program, i would have thought it would have been of great interest and importance. BUT im sure police have their reasons for proceeding the way they have, especially when Max was their prime suspect from the very first day. Please dont tell me that this would not entail them having tunnel vision and focusing mostly and primarily on Max Sica......... JUSTICE ........ as for Sam Di Carlo who is defending Max, all i can say is that this man has, and is, giving it his all. The police have had all these years to do their so called job, they have stated that this is one of the biggest criminal cases in QLD`S history, they have all the resources and back up house that they need, Mr Sam Di Carlo is then a superhuman who must with extremely limited resources, funds and back up try to defend someone who has been put in this position. Good job Mr Di Carlo, there should be more like you.
Sica has been in custody sinceDecember 2008 when he was arrested for the murders of his former girlfriend Neelrna Singh, 24, and her siblings,Kunal, 18, and Sidhi, 12.
Justice Richard Chesterman, indismissing the ~ccused man's latest bid to be released on bail, said the only evidence capable of directly linking Sica to the 2003 murders was footprint impressions found at the crime scene." (However) it is not possible to say the extent! to which it might provide that link," he said in his written decision.
Justice Chesterrnan detailed evidence from Canadian policeman and expert in "footprint morphology"Robert Kennedy. Mr Kennedy had concluded that there was "strong support" for the theory that foot impressions found at the scene were made by Sica. However, under cross examination he changed his position by saying there was "support"for the theory, but not "strong support"."The footprints apart, the only evidence establishing the appellant's presence in the house on 20 April 2003 is circumstantial," JusticeChesterman said. "The most that can be said is that the Crown case is not without substance but is less than compelling."However Justice Chesterman, upholding the decision of the SupremeCourt in December to deny Sica bail, conceded that a proper assessment of the evidence could not be conducted until the completion of the committal hearing. Other evidence against Sica detailed by Justice Chesterman included:• Sica admitted visiting the Singhhouse on April 13, 15 and 17, but denied being present on April 20,when police believe the murder soccurred. • A text message to Sica found on Neelma's mobile phone suggested she expected him to visit on the night of the murders. • There was no sign of forced entry to the house. • Jewellery owned by Neelma, including an item given to her by Sica, had been stolen while other more valuable property was untouched. • Her diary was also taken. • A cigarette butt with Sica's DNA was found outside the rear door. • On the night after the killings, Sica activated a program to delete all data from his computer. Sica's committal hearing, which will determine if he will stand trial, is ongoing.
Justice Chesterman was scathing of defence lawyers' handling of the case, rejecting protests their client was "languishing in prison" and saying a six-month committal hearing was "unnecessary and wasteful".
(When police BELIEVE murders occurred being the key word. Plus they have statements from family members and others who saw him at home on thatEaster Sunday night)
(Max and Neelma also spoke via phone on that same Easter Sunday night at 11.10pm, txt message was sent at 8.57pm. Neelma was not feeling well that night and there is a statement of one of Kunal Singh`s friend saying that Kunal had told him not to come over that night because his sister was not well.)
(No sign of forced entry does not mean that Max was the only person they knew and would let in. They might have answered the door to someone whom they did not know or might have pretented to be in need of help so as to gain entry.)
(Not only Neelma`s jewellery was taken and why would Max have taken an item of jewellery that he had given her? A bloodied pillow was taken away from the scene of the crime and police did not even notice.)
(Neelma`s diary was taken, yes i wonder by whom and when it was taken.)
(Cigarette butts containing Max`s DNA were not only found outside the rear door but also in a make shift ashtray in the garage (along with butts which had Neelma`s DNA on them) and butts containing Max`s DNA were found near gutters and in grassaround the house. Max and Neelma use to smoke in the garage and outside the house.)
(As for the the program that was running on Max`s computer, it was a program called cyber scrub and anyone could have bought it or downloaded it from the internet. The police themselves have said that Max knew quite a bit about computers, well dont you think that if he wanted to get rid of whatever, he would have taken out the hard drive and smashed it to bits? For the only way of getting rid of data from your computer is by doing exactly that. As long as you have a hard drive, info can be retrieved. Even i know that and im not a computer expert of anykind. Police took the hard drive out and sent it to America and they have all the data that was on it.)
I would also like to add that police only theorize that the Singh children were killed on late Sunday night early Monday morning. Max had gone to pick up his kids at 7.15 am on Monday morning and they have proof of this. Also bone chilling screams that were heard at around 8.30pm Monday night and around 12 or 12.08am Tuesday morning have never been confirmed as not coming from the Singh house or from anywhere else. A Mr Paul Surri was adament he saw Sidhi Singh outside the front of her house on the Easter Monday morning, police tried to tell him that he must have been mistaken, but he insisted it was then. A man was seen at around 5.30 am Tuesday morning, two women taking a walk had seen him and when this man saw them coming, he apparently ran off towards the Singh house and jumped a fence. An identicate of this man was given to the police, i didnt see it on any newspaper or news program, i would have thought it would have been of great interest and importance. BUT im sure police have their reasons for proceeding the way they have, especially when Max was their prime suspect from the very first day. Please dont tell me that this would not entail them having tunnel vision and focusing mostly and primarily on Max Sica......... JUSTICE ........ as for Sam Di Carlo who is defending Max, all i can say is that this man has, and is, giving it his all. The police have had all these years to do their so called job, they have stated that this is one of the biggest criminal cases in QLD`S history, they have all the resources and back up house that they need, Mr Sam Di Carlo is then a superhuman who must with extremely limited resources, funds and back up try to defend someone who has been put in this position. Good job Mr Di Carlo, there should be more like you.
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
JUSTICE DENIED
Sica court saga 'wasteful': judge
DANIEL HURST February 16, 2010
A Supreme Court judge has blasted as "wasteful" a six-month committal hearing into the murders of Brisbane's Singh children.
Justice Richard Chesterman this morning dismissed accused triple killer Max Sica's latest bail bid.
This despite his lawyers' complaints it could be late next year by the time the 40-year-old faces trial for the 2003 slayings.
Justice Chesterman upheld the decision of the Supreme Court in December to deny Sica freedom on bail for fear he would interfere with witnesses in the case and was a flight risk.
But in a written judgment, he took a swipe at both sides, accusing Crown prosecutors of gathering a weak case and Sica's defence team of dragging its feet and employing "unorthodox" methods.
"The most that can be said, I think, is that the Crown case is not without substance but is less than compelling," Justice Chesterman wrote.
He pointed to a series of bleached footprints found by forensics experts in the Singh house as among the only hard evidence gathered against Sica.
"The footprints apart, the only evidence establishing [Sica's] presence in the house on 20 April, 2003, is circumstantial," he said.
"Much, I suppose, will depend upon the percentage of the population which has a foot structure identical to that which left the bleached imprints in the carpets.
"About that we were told nothing."
Neelma, 24, Kunal, 18 and Sidhi Singh, 12, were found dead in a spa bath in their family home in Bridgeman Downs almost six years ago.
Sica, a former boyfriend of Neelma's and the first person on the scene, was not charged with the murders until 2008. He has strongly protested his innocence and complained at the length of time it has taken for the Crown to make its case.
Justice Chesterman said the Crown had presented no apparent motive for Sica to have killed Neelma, with Sica saying the pair had resumed a romantic relationship with one another.
He also said Sica's aggression towards the Singh family patriarch, Vijay Singh, did not, on the face of it, provide a motive for murdering his children.
During Sica's appeal, his barrister Sam Di Carlo said 800 witnesses would need to be "thoroughly" examined in the committal hearing, which would decide whether the accused man would stand trial.
But Justice Chesterman scoffed at that figure and suggested Mr Di Carlo had used the committal hearing in an "unorthodox" manner to flush out other suspects.
"It is inconceivable that there are 800 relevant witnesses to the facts germane to the prosecution case," he said.
"How [Sica] and his lawyers conduct the preliminary hearing is a matter for them, but if they chose, as they appear to have done, to use it for the purpose described and in a manner so extravagant of time, thereby prolonging proceedings, any complaint of delay loses most of its force.
"A committal hearing of six months' duration in a case such as this appears both unnecessary and wasteful."
Sica will remain behind bars.
The committal hearing is ongoing.
Unnecessary and wasteful..... for whom? A man has been denied his freedom, he languishes in a jail cell awaiting so called justice. The police have had nearly seven years to come up with what?
Police targeted Massimo Sica from the very beginning, he was the prime suspect for them and they have tried to build a case around that belief. The footprint impressions were found six days after the bodies were discovered, the police say that they were socked foot impressions with traces of bleach. Police took Massimo Sica`s foot impressions in 2004, a whole year after the discovery of the foot impressions at the crime scene. (they also took his footprints yet again on the day he was arrested 30th December 2008)Footprint experts Kennedy and Jones both state that they cant exclude him as making the impressions and they cant say when the impressions were actually made either. Jones also says that hundreds or thousands of people could have made the impressions.
Massimo Sica has never fled the juristiction even when he was a free man and could have gone wherever he wanted to go. He has never threatened anyone, caused bodily harm to anyone or tampered with any witnesses.
The confrontation between Mr Singh and Massimo Sica............. Massimo Sica was called to the Singh residence by the youngest child Sidhi, she was afraid for her mother`s safety. Phone records and text messages show this to be true. The police were called over to the house that day by both Mr Singh and Massimo Sica and statements were taken by all involved and the police have this as well. When you hear ALL of the taped conversation, you can hear the many threats made by Mr Singh to Massimo Sica, threats like, just you wait, you will see what i can do, you dont know what im cabable of, youre gonna get it etc Mr Singh tells Massimo Sica to get out of his house, Mrs Singh says to Massimo Sica,.... you have my permission to be here, are you going to protect me? Massimo Sica also says to Mr Singh,,,,,, dont worry, im not going to hurt you, what do you think i am like you? i am just going to wait for the cops.... Massimo Sica is also heard saying repeatedly to Mr Singh.... put the weapon down. Also on the taped conversation you can hear Mrs Singh make accusations against her husband in English and in Indian, they include accusations of abuse towards herself and her children, of molestation, of making her perform sex acts with others while he would tape it etc. The word CAPISCE means understand and not i will decapitate you or kill you. Police who arrived at the house were also heard on the tape and one officer is heard talking to Mr Singh then the officer leaves to go talk to the other officer and Mrs Singh, Neelma Singh, Sidhi Singh and Massimo Sica. When the officer returns to Mr Singh, he changes his tone and tells Mr Singh he has to leave the house, this is because he actually realizes what the truth is. Im sure police have the statements made by all involved on that day. So in reality who threatened who? When this came out and was made public, the headlines on the newspapers were..... Max Sica threatens Singh family in their own home..... Unbelievable...... He had gone there because he had calls and messages asking for help, he was told by Mrs Singh to protect her and that he had her permission to be there, he actually handled the whole situation quite calmly and without any incident. In return he was made out to be the violator and was said to be threatening etc. The only person who ever threatened, abused, violated, bashed, and mistreated the Singh family was Mr Singh himself. This coming from Mrs Singh`s own statements and from court documentation such as DVO orders, and court proceedings against him.
When Mr Singh and his daughter Neelma went to the Stafford police station to put in a complaint about Massimo Sica........... The police officer in his statement says that Neelma did not look like she wanted to be there, that her father seemed overbearing, that he asked to look at the text messages sent by Massimo Sica to her mobile phone and that upon looking at them he found nothing threatening or allarming in them at all. He also states that Mr Singh becomes somewhat loud and aggitated and says, ive done my bit, i am concerned for my daughters welfare, i wont be in the country, i have no neighbours that can keep an eye on my children while im gone, if anything happens to her it will be on your heads, then he states that Mr Singh shows him a statement he made when he had the confrontation with Massimo Sica in his house and a reciept the police gave him for the microcassette he gave to police of the confrontation.
I dont know about anyone else, but if i thought my daughter or any of my children could be in anykind of danger or thought someone might pose a threat to them, i would not leave them at all.
It is true that Massimo Sica has a criminal record for things he and a group of other boys committed a very long time ago, but he has served his time and paid very dearly for that. He has never not then, not ever, been violent to a person, threatened a person or caused bodily harm to a person in any way. He never has and would never lay a finger, let alone a hand or fist on a woman or a child.
These children were massacered, their lives were taken from them in a most brutal and horrendous way, they along with Massimo Sica (whom i consider to be the fourth victim in this tragedy) deserve true justice.
DANIEL HURST February 16, 2010
A Supreme Court judge has blasted as "wasteful" a six-month committal hearing into the murders of Brisbane's Singh children.
Justice Richard Chesterman this morning dismissed accused triple killer Max Sica's latest bail bid.
This despite his lawyers' complaints it could be late next year by the time the 40-year-old faces trial for the 2003 slayings.
Justice Chesterman upheld the decision of the Supreme Court in December to deny Sica freedom on bail for fear he would interfere with witnesses in the case and was a flight risk.
But in a written judgment, he took a swipe at both sides, accusing Crown prosecutors of gathering a weak case and Sica's defence team of dragging its feet and employing "unorthodox" methods.
"The most that can be said, I think, is that the Crown case is not without substance but is less than compelling," Justice Chesterman wrote.
He pointed to a series of bleached footprints found by forensics experts in the Singh house as among the only hard evidence gathered against Sica.
"The footprints apart, the only evidence establishing [Sica's] presence in the house on 20 April, 2003, is circumstantial," he said.
"Much, I suppose, will depend upon the percentage of the population which has a foot structure identical to that which left the bleached imprints in the carpets.
"About that we were told nothing."
Neelma, 24, Kunal, 18 and Sidhi Singh, 12, were found dead in a spa bath in their family home in Bridgeman Downs almost six years ago.
Sica, a former boyfriend of Neelma's and the first person on the scene, was not charged with the murders until 2008. He has strongly protested his innocence and complained at the length of time it has taken for the Crown to make its case.
Justice Chesterman said the Crown had presented no apparent motive for Sica to have killed Neelma, with Sica saying the pair had resumed a romantic relationship with one another.
He also said Sica's aggression towards the Singh family patriarch, Vijay Singh, did not, on the face of it, provide a motive for murdering his children.
During Sica's appeal, his barrister Sam Di Carlo said 800 witnesses would need to be "thoroughly" examined in the committal hearing, which would decide whether the accused man would stand trial.
But Justice Chesterman scoffed at that figure and suggested Mr Di Carlo had used the committal hearing in an "unorthodox" manner to flush out other suspects.
"It is inconceivable that there are 800 relevant witnesses to the facts germane to the prosecution case," he said.
"How [Sica] and his lawyers conduct the preliminary hearing is a matter for them, but if they chose, as they appear to have done, to use it for the purpose described and in a manner so extravagant of time, thereby prolonging proceedings, any complaint of delay loses most of its force.
"A committal hearing of six months' duration in a case such as this appears both unnecessary and wasteful."
Sica will remain behind bars.
The committal hearing is ongoing.
Unnecessary and wasteful..... for whom? A man has been denied his freedom, he languishes in a jail cell awaiting so called justice. The police have had nearly seven years to come up with what?
Police targeted Massimo Sica from the very beginning, he was the prime suspect for them and they have tried to build a case around that belief. The footprint impressions were found six days after the bodies were discovered, the police say that they were socked foot impressions with traces of bleach. Police took Massimo Sica`s foot impressions in 2004, a whole year after the discovery of the foot impressions at the crime scene. (they also took his footprints yet again on the day he was arrested 30th December 2008)Footprint experts Kennedy and Jones both state that they cant exclude him as making the impressions and they cant say when the impressions were actually made either. Jones also says that hundreds or thousands of people could have made the impressions.
Massimo Sica has never fled the juristiction even when he was a free man and could have gone wherever he wanted to go. He has never threatened anyone, caused bodily harm to anyone or tampered with any witnesses.
The confrontation between Mr Singh and Massimo Sica............. Massimo Sica was called to the Singh residence by the youngest child Sidhi, she was afraid for her mother`s safety. Phone records and text messages show this to be true. The police were called over to the house that day by both Mr Singh and Massimo Sica and statements were taken by all involved and the police have this as well. When you hear ALL of the taped conversation, you can hear the many threats made by Mr Singh to Massimo Sica, threats like, just you wait, you will see what i can do, you dont know what im cabable of, youre gonna get it etc Mr Singh tells Massimo Sica to get out of his house, Mrs Singh says to Massimo Sica,.... you have my permission to be here, are you going to protect me? Massimo Sica also says to Mr Singh,,,,,, dont worry, im not going to hurt you, what do you think i am like you? i am just going to wait for the cops.... Massimo Sica is also heard saying repeatedly to Mr Singh.... put the weapon down. Also on the taped conversation you can hear Mrs Singh make accusations against her husband in English and in Indian, they include accusations of abuse towards herself and her children, of molestation, of making her perform sex acts with others while he would tape it etc. The word CAPISCE means understand and not i will decapitate you or kill you. Police who arrived at the house were also heard on the tape and one officer is heard talking to Mr Singh then the officer leaves to go talk to the other officer and Mrs Singh, Neelma Singh, Sidhi Singh and Massimo Sica. When the officer returns to Mr Singh, he changes his tone and tells Mr Singh he has to leave the house, this is because he actually realizes what the truth is. Im sure police have the statements made by all involved on that day. So in reality who threatened who? When this came out and was made public, the headlines on the newspapers were..... Max Sica threatens Singh family in their own home..... Unbelievable...... He had gone there because he had calls and messages asking for help, he was told by Mrs Singh to protect her and that he had her permission to be there, he actually handled the whole situation quite calmly and without any incident. In return he was made out to be the violator and was said to be threatening etc. The only person who ever threatened, abused, violated, bashed, and mistreated the Singh family was Mr Singh himself. This coming from Mrs Singh`s own statements and from court documentation such as DVO orders, and court proceedings against him.
When Mr Singh and his daughter Neelma went to the Stafford police station to put in a complaint about Massimo Sica........... The police officer in his statement says that Neelma did not look like she wanted to be there, that her father seemed overbearing, that he asked to look at the text messages sent by Massimo Sica to her mobile phone and that upon looking at them he found nothing threatening or allarming in them at all. He also states that Mr Singh becomes somewhat loud and aggitated and says, ive done my bit, i am concerned for my daughters welfare, i wont be in the country, i have no neighbours that can keep an eye on my children while im gone, if anything happens to her it will be on your heads, then he states that Mr Singh shows him a statement he made when he had the confrontation with Massimo Sica in his house and a reciept the police gave him for the microcassette he gave to police of the confrontation.
I dont know about anyone else, but if i thought my daughter or any of my children could be in anykind of danger or thought someone might pose a threat to them, i would not leave them at all.
It is true that Massimo Sica has a criminal record for things he and a group of other boys committed a very long time ago, but he has served his time and paid very dearly for that. He has never not then, not ever, been violent to a person, threatened a person or caused bodily harm to a person in any way. He never has and would never lay a finger, let alone a hand or fist on a woman or a child.
These children were massacered, their lives were taken from them in a most brutal and horrendous way, they along with Massimo Sica (whom i consider to be the fourth victim in this tragedy) deserve true justice.
Friday, February 5, 2010
INDEED, OUTRAGEOUS
'Hired assassins' may have killed Singhs: Sica defence
AMELIA BENTLEY
The lawyer for accused triple-murderer Max Sica has suggested hired assassins could have been behind the murders of the Singh siblings, who were found slain in their Brisbane home seven years ago.
Barrister Sam Di Carlo made the comment in the Queensland Court of Appeal yesterday, where he argued his client deserved bail as he awaits trial accused of the 2003 murders of his ex-girlfriend Neelma, 24, her brother Kunal and 12-year-old sister Sidhi Singh.
The father of three from Stafford Heights, has failed in two Supreme Court bids for freedom since his November 2008 arrest for the murders.
But his lawyers took the issue to the Court of Appeal, arguing the case against Sica was "extremely weak" and he should not be kept in prison awaiting a trial which may not happen until 2012.
Mr Di Carlo said there were several others who could have been responsible for the murders - including hired assassins engaged by the siblings' father, Vijay Singh.
"There's been an abundance of evidence pointing to Mr Singh ... the day before he goes overseas he just happens to buy a bottle of bleach," he said.
Bleach, the court was told, was used to clean up parts of the scene of the murders.
During two hours of submissions, Mr Di Carlo argued Supreme Court Justice James Douglas had been mistaken when he did not have proper regard to the strength of the crown case against Sica.
He also urged Court of Appeal judges to listen to the Triple-0 call Sica made after he discovered the Singh siblings' dead in a spa bath.
"It's incredible. Short of Edward Norton in Primal Fear [Sica] must be the best actor [if he's guilty of murdering Singhs]," he said.
But Crown prosecutor Brendan Campbell told the Court of Appeal while the case against Sica was a circumstantial one, Mr Di Carlo was mistaken about much of the evidence.
"It's an outrageous suggestion the father is responsible for killing his own children," he said.
Mr Campbell said the Singhs' killer had used a garden fork to injure the siblings and then put the tool back in its usual spot.
"If it was assassins, they have used a weapon from inside the house," he said.
He denied Mr Di Carlo's suggestion police had "tunnel vision" and had decided Mr Sica was the murderer.
"Every other lead that has been raised has been chased down and excluded," he said.
The Court of Appeal has reserved its decision in the matter.
("It's an outrageous suggestion the father is responsible for killing his own children," he said.)
This is a comment made by Mr Campbell for prosecution, well i say that it is even more outrageous to think that Massimo Sica had anything at all to do with the death of the woman that he loved and her sibblings whom he also considered as part of his family.
Massimo Sica has been portrayed as being violent and so forth when there is nothing indicating him to be that way inclined, infact far from it. He has made foolish mistakes in the past, which i might add did not have anything to do with being violent or threatening towards anyone in anyway at all, and he has paid very dearly for it. HOWEVER Mr V.J. Singh has been violent, threatening, abbusive and this is against his own family members. Like i have already stated in this blog, Massimo Sica was called to the Singh residence not only on the occassion where Mr Singh happened to record it, but on other occassions as well.
That recorded episode was completely twisted and made to look like Massimo Sica had gone there to threaten the Singh family. Massimo Sica was called there by Sidhi Singh (the youngest child) because she was afraid for her mothers safety. If Massimo Sica was so violent, so threatening, so psychotic, why did he not just knock Mr Singh out there and then? You can clearly hear Mrs Singh say to Massimo Sica, are you going to protect me? you have my permission to be here, and so on and so forth. What about all the threats Mr Singh made to Massimo Sica like, you dont know what im capable of, just you wait youre gonna get it, you will see what i can do etc etc . There are police records (who were called to go there by both Massimo Sica and Mr Singh) indicating why Massimo Sica was there.
Massimo Sica has been accused of committing this horrible crime with not a scintilla of DNA evidence linking him to it, without a motive, and police had also targeted him as a prime suspect practically within the same day he discovered the bodies. Massimo Sica and his family have always fully co operated with authorities in each and every way and beyond.
Neelma Singh, Sidhi Singh and Kunal Singh deserve true justice, for what happened to them was atrocious. Massimo Sica is truly the forth victim in this tragedy and i only hope and pray that he and those three children will get true justice.
AMELIA BENTLEY
The lawyer for accused triple-murderer Max Sica has suggested hired assassins could have been behind the murders of the Singh siblings, who were found slain in their Brisbane home seven years ago.
Barrister Sam Di Carlo made the comment in the Queensland Court of Appeal yesterday, where he argued his client deserved bail as he awaits trial accused of the 2003 murders of his ex-girlfriend Neelma, 24, her brother Kunal and 12-year-old sister Sidhi Singh.
The father of three from Stafford Heights, has failed in two Supreme Court bids for freedom since his November 2008 arrest for the murders.
But his lawyers took the issue to the Court of Appeal, arguing the case against Sica was "extremely weak" and he should not be kept in prison awaiting a trial which may not happen until 2012.
Mr Di Carlo said there were several others who could have been responsible for the murders - including hired assassins engaged by the siblings' father, Vijay Singh.
"There's been an abundance of evidence pointing to Mr Singh ... the day before he goes overseas he just happens to buy a bottle of bleach," he said.
Bleach, the court was told, was used to clean up parts of the scene of the murders.
During two hours of submissions, Mr Di Carlo argued Supreme Court Justice James Douglas had been mistaken when he did not have proper regard to the strength of the crown case against Sica.
He also urged Court of Appeal judges to listen to the Triple-0 call Sica made after he discovered the Singh siblings' dead in a spa bath.
"It's incredible. Short of Edward Norton in Primal Fear [Sica] must be the best actor [if he's guilty of murdering Singhs]," he said.
But Crown prosecutor Brendan Campbell told the Court of Appeal while the case against Sica was a circumstantial one, Mr Di Carlo was mistaken about much of the evidence.
"It's an outrageous suggestion the father is responsible for killing his own children," he said.
Mr Campbell said the Singhs' killer had used a garden fork to injure the siblings and then put the tool back in its usual spot.
"If it was assassins, they have used a weapon from inside the house," he said.
He denied Mr Di Carlo's suggestion police had "tunnel vision" and had decided Mr Sica was the murderer.
"Every other lead that has been raised has been chased down and excluded," he said.
The Court of Appeal has reserved its decision in the matter.
("It's an outrageous suggestion the father is responsible for killing his own children," he said.)
This is a comment made by Mr Campbell for prosecution, well i say that it is even more outrageous to think that Massimo Sica had anything at all to do with the death of the woman that he loved and her sibblings whom he also considered as part of his family.
Massimo Sica has been portrayed as being violent and so forth when there is nothing indicating him to be that way inclined, infact far from it. He has made foolish mistakes in the past, which i might add did not have anything to do with being violent or threatening towards anyone in anyway at all, and he has paid very dearly for it. HOWEVER Mr V.J. Singh has been violent, threatening, abbusive and this is against his own family members. Like i have already stated in this blog, Massimo Sica was called to the Singh residence not only on the occassion where Mr Singh happened to record it, but on other occassions as well.
That recorded episode was completely twisted and made to look like Massimo Sica had gone there to threaten the Singh family. Massimo Sica was called there by Sidhi Singh (the youngest child) because she was afraid for her mothers safety. If Massimo Sica was so violent, so threatening, so psychotic, why did he not just knock Mr Singh out there and then? You can clearly hear Mrs Singh say to Massimo Sica, are you going to protect me? you have my permission to be here, and so on and so forth. What about all the threats Mr Singh made to Massimo Sica like, you dont know what im capable of, just you wait youre gonna get it, you will see what i can do etc etc . There are police records (who were called to go there by both Massimo Sica and Mr Singh) indicating why Massimo Sica was there.
Massimo Sica has been accused of committing this horrible crime with not a scintilla of DNA evidence linking him to it, without a motive, and police had also targeted him as a prime suspect practically within the same day he discovered the bodies. Massimo Sica and his family have always fully co operated with authorities in each and every way and beyond.
Neelma Singh, Sidhi Singh and Kunal Singh deserve true justice, for what happened to them was atrocious. Massimo Sica is truly the forth victim in this tragedy and i only hope and pray that he and those three children will get true justice.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
