Max Sica child sex trial delayed until early 2013 to hear new evidence from alleged victim

MAX Sica's child sex trial may not re-commence until February after it was adjourned in order to hear new evidence from a 17-year-old girl who allegedly had a sexual relationship with the convicted killer that started when she was nine.

Brisbane District Court Judge Michael Shanahan adjourned the trial Thursday morning and ordered Sica's alleged victim be recalled to give further evidence to the court during a preliminary hearing, which is yet to be listed.

It came after the court heard new evidence tendered in the child's Victim Impact Statement that represented a "substantial change in the allegations" that had already been explored in her interviews with police and during earlier cross-examination.

"It seems to me the child, having given evidence in the normal way before a jury, as a result of the victim impact statement, she would be recalled to be further cross-examined in relation to the new allegation," Judge Shanahan said.


"It seems to me in these circumstances where the information disclosed in that paragraph of the victim impact statement as it's an allegation of a different nature to what the complainant spoke about in extensive police interviews and in earlier cross examinations.

"It's in the interests of justice to allow the accused to cross-examine those allegations."

Sica, 42, has pleaded not guilty to 21 sex offences, including two counts of rape and one of maintaining a sexual relationship with a child between November 15, 2004 and September 10, 2008.

Then aged 35 to 39, he was also charged with nine counts each of unlawful carnal knowledge and indecent dealing of a child under 16.

Sica's alleged sexual relationship with the girl lasted from when she was nine until she was 13.

Judge Shanahan tentatively set aside two weeks from February 4, 2013, when the trial could recommence.

Earlier this week the court was told the girl, then aged 9, and her mother, moved in to Sica's home at Stafford with his parents and girlfriend in late 2004.

It heard the girl would spend time alone in the house with Sica while his girlfriend and the child's mother worked shifts at the family's pizza outlets.

The alleged relationship was revealed when the girl told school friends she was in love with an older man with whom she was having sex.

In July, a Brisbane Supreme Court jury found Sica guilty of the 2003 murder of the Singh siblings Neelma, 24, Kunal, 18, and Sidhi, 12.



http://max-sica.blogspot.com.au/2010/04/common-sense.html


http://max-sica.blogspot.com.au/2010/04/alleged-sex-offence-charges.html


Please do click on the links and read ALL the facts.
In my opinion, if this mans name was not Max Sica, this case would have never made it to a court of law. Remember that all these allegations led Max Sica to be charged with sexual abuse of a minor.
Bail had been granted to him for this case.
In the mean time, he once more had a total character assassination by media regarding the charges. Two months after he was granted bail for these allegations, he was charged and arrested for the Singh murders.

Max Sica's sex case adjourned as court questions discrepancies in interview transcript

THE child sex trial of convicted triple murderer Max Sica has ground to halt again, this time so lawyers can fact-check a written transcript of a police interview with his alleged victim.

Brisbane District Court Judge Michael Shanahan adjourned the trial until Tuesday to allow prosecutor Todd Fuller SC to check the transcripts.

It came after the court spent more than an hour rewinding sections of the police interview because the words being said during the interview did not match what had been written in the transcripts.

``If this is going to keep happening, I'm going to stop the trial and the transcripts can be prepared properly,'' Judge Shanahan warned before lunch, when the interview had already run for 54 minutes.

But when the trial resumed at 2.30pm, Mr Fuller conceded a new transcript had to be prepared in the case of the child's second interview with police.

He said a staff member had been reviewing the interview for the past two hours in the hope of having a transcript ready this afternoon.

``It must have been at some stage saved incorrectly, that's all I can say,'' Mr Fuller said.

Judge Shanahan said it should have been done earlier.

He said there was a ''dramatic'' difference between what could be seen on the transcript and what could be heard on the interview and pointed to whole sections of the tape which had been left out.

Barrister Sam Di Carlo, for Sica, said he would need time to review the new transcripts before the trial recommenced.

He also suggested the second interview be re-watched from the beginning with the correct transcript.

Judge Shanahan adjourned the hearing until 10am Tuesday.

It's the second false start for Sica's child sex trial, which was initially scheduled to begin on Monday a week ago.

The trial had to be adjourned for several days in order to give the defence more time to respond to a controversial medical report which had been tendered by the prosecution.

Sica, 42, has pleaded not guilty to 21 sex offences, including two counts of rape and one of maintaining a sexual relationship with a child between November 15, 2004, and September 10, 2008.

He has also been charged with nine counts of unlawful carnal knowledge and indecent dealing of a child under 16.

Judge Shanahan was told Sica's alleged sexual relationship with the girl lasted from when she was nine until she was 13.

Earlier today, the court heard recorded police interviews with the girl, who gave a slow and often painful account of what happened between them.

''It happened a lot of times... him having sex with me,'' she said.

The court heard the girl, then aged 9, and her mother moved in to Max Sica's home at Stafford with his parents and girlfriend in late 2004.

It heard the girl would spend time alone in the house with Sica while his girlfriend and the child's mother worked shifts at the family's pizza outlets.

The child told police how she had been ''mucking around'' with Sica on his bed when the relationship first started.

''He told me to put my legs around his neck,'' the girl, who was around five months away from turning 10 at the time, told police during the interview in September, 2008.

She said Sica had tried to remove her pyjama pants with his teeth.

The girl told police about a second encounter with Sica two weeks later.

Last week it was revealed Sica's alleged nine-year-old victim started documenting the intimate sexual relationship with him in coded-diary entries.

Prosecutor Todd Fuller, SC, said the alleged relationship was revealed when the girl told school friends she was in love with an older man with whom she was having sex.

In July, a Brisbane Supreme Court jury found Sica guilty of the 2003 murder of the Singh siblings Neelma, 24, Kunal, 18, and Sidhi, 12.

He received a non-parole 35-year jail term.

http://max-sica.blogspot.com.au/2010/04/common-sense.html

http://max-sica.blogspot.com.au/2010/04/alleged-sex-offence-charges.html

DIAL $50,000 FOR MURDER TALE

Dial $50,000 for murder tale

A CRIME that horrified a state has become a nice little earner for some.

Channel 9 last night paid thousands of dollars for an interview with the wife of Max Sica. He is locked away for 35 years for murdering the three Singh children in their Bridgeman Downs home in 2003.

Victims of crime have labelled the transaction "disgusting", less than a month after Sica was found guilty.

Nine claims it did not pay Shiv Sica. Instead, Brisbane public relations agent Lyall Mercer, who claims to also act on behalf of churches and the LNP, says he was paid for arranging the interview.

Mrs Sica last night told A Current Affair that her husband was innocent and that the trial had taken a toll on her and the couple's six-year-old daughter.

Sica is serving the longest jail sentence in Queensland history for the murders of Neelma, 24, Kunal, 18, and Sidhi Singh, 12.

The Courier-Mail understands Mr Mercer contacted media outlets to negotiate the interview, indicating that a $50,000 fee could be paid to him rather than direct to the Sica family.

Mr Mercer denied money was passed on to the family but any fee paid to him was "commercial in-confidence".

"I wouldn't be in a position to comment on anything but those figures ($50,000) are out of the world," he said.

"It was really done because Shiv was wanting to do something, she was being approached for interviews."

Today Tonight producer Rodney Lohse said he declined Mr Mercer's request for $50,000.

"I obviously asked whether he was expecting a fee and he said yes, and that a figure that had been mentioned from another program was $50,000," Lohse said.

"I told him it was going to be a very hard sell, considering the guy is a convicted murderer with an extensive criminal history. I said I didn't even think it was legal."

ACA bureau chief Amanda Paterson said no money had been paid directly to the Sica family. But she refused to comment on whether Mercer PR, or anyone else was paid.

"For the record, ACA has not paid Shiv Sica or the Sica family one cent," Paterson said.

"Mercer PR contacted us like they did a number of media outlets. The family was great but no money changed hands . . . with the Sica family."

Queensland Homicide Victims' Support Group general manager Ross Thompson, whose son and two others were tortured and killed in 2005, said he was angry and disgusted.

"This is disgusting," he said. "Shirley (the Singh siblings' mother) is going to be devastated. It's just insane."

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

COMMENTS ON NEWS ARTICLE ABOVE HEADED....

Dial $50,000 for murder tale

What i find disgusting is a newspaper using such a headline as the one used above.

Without even verifying one shred of what they printed, they decided to print it anyway. BUT.. after all that i have learnt about how it all works, i really should not be surprised.

Disgusted and outraged is what people should be. An innocent man has been convicted of a crime he did not commit. He, his family and supporters have every right to fight for true justice to prevail.

As for the comments made by Mr Ross Thompson... I am truly sorry for the murder of your son and others. I can understand the pain and grief. I do not know the details surrounding your sons case. In Mr Sica`s case, he was charged and convicted on assumptions, circumstances and hear say. Not one shred of DNA or forensic evidence against him, no hard facts, no smoking gun. The prosecution did not even need to have a motive.

A victim is also a person who has been wrongly convicted of a crime. There have been quite a few well documented cases regarding wrong convictions, some are stated on this blog.

What would you do if your partner, parent, friend or sibling was convicted of a crime they did not commit? Would you accept the conviction and move on? Would you fight with whatever means you have at your disposal to help an innocent person be freed? Or would you just give up?

Max Sica and his family have been and are going through hell. Mentally, physically and financially tested. STILL, this will not deter them. They stand united and determined and will never give up, their spirit will not be broken.

To be a victim is a horrible thing, especially when you are the victim of a horrendous crime. It is also horrible to be a victim when you are wrongly convicted and truly innocent and the justice system allows such an injustice to occur.

Max Sica has always had a trial by media. He has been in the media headlines regarding the murders since 2003. Even for a traffic offence he was in the media, the heading would always be.... the man accused of murdering the Singh siblings... etc.

Laws should change regarding media hype. How can a person get a fair trial when they are splattered all over the media with half truths and sometimes just sheer lies? This all before they were ever charged with a crime or had at least a chance to have their day in court.

Most media are the ones making the real money and destroying lives in the process without a care or an ounce of decency. This all done legally because they have the power and the rights to do so. If it was i or you to do this to a person, we would be charged with defamation, obstruction to privacy etc.

Think about it, you never know, you could be next.

http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/national/sica-didnt-murder-singh-siblings-brother/story-e6frfku9-1226434209884

http://max-sica.blogspot.com.au/2010/04/alleged-sex-offence-charges.html

http://max-sica.blogspot.com.au/2010/04/common-sense.html

NOT THE END

Max Sica was found guilty by twelve people who apparently had no doubt that he committed this horrendous crime. No proof, no evidence, no DNA. If this is a case where there is no reasonable doubt for a jury, i wonder which case they would find reasonable doubt in.

Max sent nude photos of Neelma....said he had a brain tumor..... well Neelma knew he had sent the photos and that he did not really have a tumor, but she still chose to see him as Max chose to still be with her when she told him she had slept with someone else while in Fiji with her mother. Are these the circumstantial grounds in a case which prove someone brutally murdered three people?

No motive needed they said, maybe a crime of passion, maybe yet again premeditated they said. A different scenario for whatever purpose.

There is no justice...an innocent man has been found guilty of a crime he did not commit. Without one shred, one iota, of REAL evidence against him. For those who think there is something to rejoice about such a verdict, i only hope and pray that you might not end up being the next victim of the so called justice system.

We will fight this verdict, we will not give up or bury our heads in the sand. We have learnt a lot about how the justice system operates in all these years and we may not be experts in the field, but we are not totally stupid either.

Max Sica and his family will fight for true justice, we will fight till he is set free for he is truly innocent.

They have said this case to be the biggest criminal case in QLD history..... more like the biggest sham, the biggest injustice QLD has ever seen.

This is not the end, this is now a new beginning...and like i read in a news article today.... stay tuned, there will be more to come.

WE ARE WITH YOU

MAX, WE ARE ALL WITH YOU, WE ARE ALL PRAYING FOR YOU AND FOR THOSE TWELVE PEOPLE WHO HAVE YOUR LIFE PRACTICALLY IN THEIR HANDS.

HAVE FAITH MY BROTHER. WE KNOW WHO YOU TRULY ARE AND SO DOES HE.

WE LOVE YOU AND WILL ALWAYS BE BY YOUR SIDE.

MAY THE LORD BE WITH YOU AND WITH US ALL AT THIS TIME, THIS TIME OF GREAT NEED.

THE judge in the Max Sica murder trial has warned the jury not to pay attention to information in the public arena, which could be "plain wrong or misleading".

Justice John Byrne also said the statements of witnesses, not lawyers, should be considered evidence.

Sica, 42, has pleaded not guilty to murdering Neelma Singh, 24, Kunal Singh, 18, and Sidhi Singh, 12, at Bridgeman Downs, on April 21, 2003.

Justice Byrne, whose summing up was interrupted by a bomb scare at another courtroom in the Supreme Court building, had told the jury they would hear from a summing up under 252 key points.

He sad he would direct them on the law that applies but they were to determine the facts of the case.

Justice Byrne said the jury would then apply the law as explained to them to the facts they found.

"You are the sole judges of the facts ... you must strive for an unanimous verdict, guilty or not guilty," he told the jury.

Justice Byrne warned the jury that the answers of witnesess was the evidence, not statements by the lawyers.

"In short, a thing suggested by a lawyer is not evidence," he said.

Justice Byrne also emphasised that no external influence such as media reports, textbooks or internet should play a part in the deliberations.

He said sometimes information in the public arena was plain wrong or misleading.

Justice Byrne said the jury should only draw inferences which were based on facts prioved by evidence.

Evidence may be accepted in whole or in part, he added.

Justice Byrne also warned the jury that in general powers of observation and retention of memory of what was seen or heard were "fragile".

"Minds do not fucntion like recording machines," he said.

COMMENTS FROM ABOVE NEWS ARTICLE

He said sometimes information in the public arena was plain wrong or misleading.

The above statement was made by the judge in the news article. Well i can tell you that from the beginning, there has been misleading or plain wrong information given to the public by not only the newspapers themselves, but even with the police information itself. Fragile minds and minds that do not function like machines he says.......

WHOSE MINDS is he alluding to? Witnesses who were questioned the same day or the following day in which the bodies were discovered? Or is he alluding to police who made Max Sica their prime suspect only hours after he had discovered the bodies (and in my opinion) had tunnel vision and did not bother investigating in full all other leads presented to them? Or maybe the witnesses that never got to use their minds because they were not called up to give evidence?

The crowns case is practically based on assumptions, circumstances, suggestions....A man and his 3 children,his wife and his family`s whole lives are at stake for this. I only hope and pray that true justice takes its course and that an innocent man does not pay the price.

The edited list Mr Di Carlo gave the jury:

10. ''You could not be satisfied there was a full and proper investigation.

9. You could not be satisfied there was a proper and full investigation into Fiji [where the Singhs' parents were on holiday at the time of the

8. There are [finger]prints outstanding at the Singh house that are identifiable but to date have not been identified. There is always the chance that sometime down the track they may be identified.

7. The unexplained but dismissed as distractions of the blood-stained sandal in Neelma's room, the cup, the t-shirt and the blue bucket.

6. In the five years and eight months, Sica did not run away and despite the deployment of undercover police, listening devices and tracking devices, they were not able to produce one iota of direct evidence.

5. The failure to delete from Neelma's phone the 8.56 message "See you later, coming down with something."

4. The compete lack of any evidence of a violent disposition on Max's part, despite an abundance of provocative incidents.

3. No one person could engage in such blood letting, carried bodies to a spa, carried blankets and bed linen to a spa and then so thoroughly clean a house of that magnitude that every single trace of his presence and involvement in the murder is erased in the window the Crown contends.

2. The investigation has failed to identify who was at the door around 8.30pm on Easter Sunday and why was it necessary for Neelma to cut her conversation with her sister to answer the door when Kunal and Sidhi were home. Ask yourself who used this cup that they didn't get the DNA from in Neelma's room.

1. Reasons you couldn't be satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt of the guilt of the accused: Not one iota of the victims' DNA, blood, or other bodily fluids or bleach etcetera was detected on Max Sica, his clothes, his cars and not one iota of Max Sica's DNA, blood, other bodily fluids, hair etcetera was detected at the crime scene and I ask you to compare that with the minuscule amount they found in respect to Johnson and Daffy [two identified DNA samples in the house] which had been left some considerable period of time before on one small square of carpet.''

To all concerned

.Firstly, Max Sica asked for an judge only trial (due to all the media hype concerning this case,) then he requested the trial be heard in another state where it would be fairer (as most other states allow the defence to call witnesses and enter evidence, and where the media coverage was not all one sided). These requests were denied.

Now after the state has spent $23 million on this circus; the judge wants to give a massive summing up to the jury. ARE THEY FOR REAL? WHAT A JOKE! NO WONDER THEY GET CONVICTIONS WRONG SO MANY TIMES .

POINTS TO CONSIDER

· THE PAINTER (WHICH THE DPP DID NOT CALL TO THE STAND) WAS 110% SURE OF SEEING THE LITTLE GIRL COME OUT TO GET HER DOG MONDAY MORNING. NOTED IN WORK DIARY.

· THE GIRL WHO WENT TO KNOCK ON THE DOOR AND HEARD LOUD MUSIC ON MONDAY AFTERNOON, NO ONE CAME TO DOOR BUT THE MUSIC WAS TURNED OFF.

· THE NEIGBOURS (9 IN TOTAL) THAT HEARD THE BLOOD GURLDING SCREAMS ON THE MONDAY NIGHT JUST AFTER MIDNIGHT COMING FROM THE SINGH HOUSE, AGAIN THE DPP DID NOT CALL THEM TO THE STAND.

· THE POLICE PSYCHIC THAT TOLD POLICE MAX DID NOT DO IT AND THAT IT WAS TWO GUYS; A SMALL ASIAN GUY AND A BIG TALL INDONESIAN LOOKING MAN, AND GUESS WHAT? AT THE CRIME SCENE THEY FOUND A XXXL WHITE T-SHIRT AND SIZE 8 SANDLES WITH BLOOD ON THEM, WHY DID THEY NOT CALL HER TO THE STAND?

· THE FACT THE FATHER HAD SEX WITH A YOUNG GIRL, THEN BRIBED THE FAMILY WITH $500 AND A FEW GIFTS.

· THE FACT THAT ONLY THE 3 CHILDREN THAT MR SINGH WAS HAVING PROBLEMS WITH WERE KILLED AND NOT HIS FAVOURED CHILD. AT THE MOST CONVENIENT TIME WHEN THE POLICE WERE LOOKING INTO HIM MOLESTING HIS YOUNGEST, AND IT WAS ON TAPE THAT HE SAYS TO HIS WIFE “YOU KNOW I LIKE IT.”.

· THE LADY THAT SAW TWO MEN APPROX 5AM TUESDAY, JUMP THE FENCE BEHIND THE SINGH HOUSE. WHY NOT CALL HER TO THE STAND?

· THE FACT THAT MR SINGH SAYS TO MAX (AND ITS RECORDED BY HIMSELF) “YOU WAIT, YOU WILL GO THROUGH YOUR WORST NIGHTMARE SOON AND REMEMBER IT WAS ME AND I WILL BE LOOKING DOWN AND LAUGHING”, ”YOU DON’T KNOW WHAT IS COMING AND WHAT I AM CAPABLE OF” CHILLING WHEN YOU CONSIDER THEIR CULTURE KILLS THEIR OWN CHILDREN FOR SILLY REASONS ALL THE TIME AND HE TELLS THEM THEY ARE DEAD TO HIM.

THERE ARE MANY MORE WITNESSES THEY COULD HAVE CALLED BUT DID NOT. (SO AS NOT TO SHOW THE TRUE CASE; ) THE FACT MR SINGH WAS UNDER FEDRAL POLICE INVESTIGATION..... I HAVE BEEN MADE AWARE THEY WILL CONTINUE WITH THIS INVESTIGATION AFTER THE CASE WITH MAX IS DEALT WITH (HOW UNFAIR).

The following statements i must advise for legal reasons are all alleged and some like the end scenario is an intelligent thought plausable account of what may have been the sorry last days,for the Singh children.

You may recall mr singh was bashed in another home invasion a few years prior,just too many questions when it comes to this dispicable person

· THE ''ALLEGATIONS'' THAT THE FATHER (MR SINGH) STOLE A DRUM OF DRUGS FROM HIS BUSINESS DEALING WITH ASIAN GANGS AND LIED THAT IT NEVER ARRIVED IN HIS SPARE PARTS CONTAINER THAT CAME FROM INDONESIA. IT WAS NOTED THE VALUE OF THESE DRUGS WERE $350,000 TO $400,000 THIS WAS FURTHER CONFIRMED BY A FINANCIAL ADVISOR WHO WAS INVITED TO THE SINGH HOUSE AND ASKED HOW MR SINGH COULD CLEAN AND UTILISE SEVERAL HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS OF CASH. THIS MAN DISAPPEARED AND HAS NEVER BEEN FOUND.

IT IS OUR BELIEF THAT THE KILLERS ENTERED THE HOUSE SUNDAY NIGHT; MADE THE CHILDREN SEND OUT SMS MESSAGES TO THEIR FRIENDS TO NOT COME OVER, THEN KEPT THE CHILDREN ALIVE NOT WANTING TO KILL THEM, TRYING TO GET MR SINGH TO PAY BACK THE MONEY HE SOLD THEIR DRUGS FOR. WHEN MR SINGH DID NOT RESPOND OR REFUSE TO GIVE THEM THEIR MONEY BACK, THEY KILLED THEM THEN CLEANED UP AND LEFT TUESDAY MORNING.

ANOTHER KEY FACT IS MR SINGH HAD TO SELL A PROPERTY OVERSEAS AND THE MONEY WAS NOT ACCOUNTED FOR; SO HE PAID THE KILLERS BACK ONLY AFTER THEY KILLED HIS 3 CHILDREN AND THREATENED TO KILL HIM OR HIS OTHER CHILDREN TOO. WHAT MAN WOULD LEAVE HIS CHILDREN TO FACE THE MESS HE CAUSED?

THE FACTS SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES

MOTIVE

What the Sica trial has not heard in the way of motive......

Because under QLD`S justice system you are not allowed to enter evidence that is not chief evidence... in other words, since the prosecution did not call the witnesses to give evidence, max`s lawyer was not allowed to....... otherwise there were no less than five convicted drug dealers who had put forward statements about Mr Singh`s alleged drug dealings and double crossing the Asians he was dealing with. Apparently he lied and said he had not recieved the drugs in the shipping container and when the truth was found out, this could have been a cause of retaliation and motive for the murders.

Mr Singh only declared $17.000 taxable yearly income. YET...he had three motor vehicles, four properties and flew back and forth from Australia to Fiji. Where did the money come from for this?

There are many witnesses that could not be called.

Today in court, they stated that max`s son could not recall picking up his auntie, they could have called upon the statements of the other two children in the vehicle to corroborate this fact, but max`s lawyer was not allowed to call upon those statements.... yet the prosecution could have, but chose not to, because it did not suit their case or agenda.

PLEASE NOTE....

Under QLD law, i must state most of the above (and in certain parts of this blog) is alleged and can only be fact once the documents and or witnesses are produced in court. And in this case, only the prosecution can request them....God forbid they should do the right thing......

links to sex case ....all proven with documentation and in court.

http://max-sica.blogspot.com.au/2010/04/alleged-sex-offence-charges.html

http://max-sica.blogspot.com.au/2010/04/common-sense.html

WHAT IS JUSTICE......

The jury asked to see Andrea Bowman`s taped police interview. The judge (not in the presence of the jury) states that due to the many inconsistencies of Mrs Bowman, it would unduly prejudice the evidence she gave in court in front of the jury.

Is that not the idea to show she right out lied or at best had the police officer put words into her mouth?

She virtually begs to stay on the case when the police advise her that they would have to let her go as in 5 yrs she got nowhere. She asks for a few more weeks and she says she is sure to get a confession. She also says that she cannot wear a wire or she wont act natural. More like she then wont be able to make up stories so she can stay in the lime light.

She has in the past put her own father in jail convincing her younger sister she was molested by him...only to later be proven was all made up on a pack of lies.

She has many mental issues all relating to be the center of attention as attested to by a few psychologists.

Max Sica`s walk through of the crime scene (again not fully shown to the jury) shows him breaking down in tears and saying that she (Neelma) should have called me, i would of saved them. He says this over and over again. He is in total shock and has to be assisted from the Singh house. No one should have been made to go into that house again.

They did not produce Doctors evidence to show Max Sica suffers from a phobia of seeing blood.

The police themselves say that in 8yrs, they have not found one woman or child that Max Sica had ever abused or hit. You dont go from not abusing anyone straight into murder.

Why did the prosecution not call all the neighbours who heard the bone chilling screams that were heard coming from the direction of the Singh home between the Easter Monday night and the early hours of the Tuesday morning?

Because the police documentation itself says that they must make time of murders on Sunday early Monday as Max Sica had firm alibi for other times.

The painter who saw Sidhi Singh outside the front door of the house on the Monday morning again was not called and his full interview not shown.

They could have called not less that 22 witnesses to prove Max Sica`s whereabouts from Sunday night to the Tuesday but did not follow through with statements. It did not suit their case.

The police own psychic that has helped them solve other cases told them it was not Max Sica but a large big Asian or Indian man and a small man of Indian appearance...and surprise, surprise, at the crime scene was found a size 8 pair of Indian thongs with blood on them that police lost, and a XXL white t-shirt.

A partial face and earprint made with blood did not match Max Sica or any of the Singh children.

Police chose not to send the unidentified finger prints found around Neelma`s bed head because they said that it would cost too much...are we for real???what b.s.

No mention that Mr Singh was under investigation by Australian Federal Police. No mention that he allegedly stole a drum of drugs from his drug associates. Street value of 2 to 350.000 dollars.

He owned many properties in Australia and Fiji, yet the police accountant stated that it was very odd as he declared a taxable income of only $17.000. When he told his superiors about this, they told the accountant not to look any further into Mr Singhs finances. WHY???

His own daughter (sidhi singh) who was 12yrs old at the time, charged the father with sexual abuse. On an audio tape Mr Singh tells his wife...you know i like it...this only a couple of months before she was killed. Thus this investigation was cancelled.

Neelma hated her father and Kunal brought shame to the family by also dealing in drugs and stealing. The oldest living child is the favoured child of Mr Singh. In fact, on a taped conversation, Mrs Singh says that Mr Singh and her oldest child Archana are the same. She says that they are both sick and both the same. She also accuses her husband of molesting the oldest child when she was little on that same recording.

How would one person kill three people and not one of them call for help, try to run or try to bite, kick and scratch their attacker?

There are many hours of police interviews that the jury was not allowed to see. WHY NOT? Because it did not suit their case. That is not fair. All statements and witnesses should be called but due to QLD old outdated law, it was not allowed to be placed before the jury.

One can only hope that at least one jury member has common sense and also is strong enough to stay strong and not be persuaded by the others.

The channel 7 documentary show said....it was shocking that the jury not see the evidence that they had seen and that after the trial they can air it all on TV. BUT that by then is too late. Why wait for an injustice to happen first..............

POINTS TO CONSIDER

There are many things about this case that makes one think.

Max Sica was the one and only prime suspect hours after discovering the bodies of the Singh children on the 22/03/2003. This has been proven in court.

Police had discovered 52 unidentified finger prints in the Singh home. A partial face and ear print was also discovered on the lower part of a door in the Singh house which did not belong to Max Sica or any known persons regarding this case.

Police say they found what appeared to be partial socked foot impressions with traces of bleach leading up the stairs at the Singh house. Max Sica was asked to give his foot prints (with all different types of socks, thin, thick, large and small etc) a whole year after he discovered the bodies. According to the experts in this field, they state that the so called impressions cannot be excluded as belonging to Max Sica but they cannot state they are actually Max Sicas either. They cannot even state that these impressions were left at the scene at the time the murders occurred.

The coroners who did an autopsy on the bodies state that they cannot pinpoint time of death because of factors involved in the crime itself. They can only state that they must have died anytime after the last contact they had with anyone up until a few hours before they were found dead.

Police only theorize that the murders took place late Easter Sunday early Monday because Max Sica was asleep in his bed and therefore to them he has no alibi. Shortly after 7am on the Monday morning, Max Sica had gone to pick up his children from his ex wife`s house. He had firm alibi from that time till the time he discovered the bodies on the Tuesday.

The confrontation between Max Sica and Mr Singh that took place at the Singhs when they were still alive was made to look like Max Sica had just rocked up to the Singh House and decided to cause havoc. This is not the case and if one hears all of that taped recording, you will certainly see why Max Sica was there. He was called by the youngest child Sidhi Singh because she was afraid that once again her father was going to hurt her mother or her and her sister Neelma. There are text messages proving this and police were called to the house that day by both Max Sica and Mr Singh. They took statements from all involved, Mr Singh was told to leave his house and the proof is all there in black and white. Max Sica was called on many occasions by a member of the Singh family when there was some sort of domestic violence at the Singh home.

People who lived next to the Singh house at the time of their deaths came forward to police stating that they had heard screams, whip cracks or gunshots. They did not hear these screams etc on the Sunday or early Monday....they heard it on late Monday and just after midnight going into the Tuesday.

Archana Singh (sister of the deceased) stated in court that on the Easter sunday at about 830pm, she was having a conversation with her sister Neelma via internet. She stated that her sister Neelma told her that there was someone at the door and she had to go answer. Neelma never went back to the internet and her sister Archana had no more contact with her after this incident. Till this day no one knows who was at the door that night and at that particular time. I would imagine that if it was a family member or a very close friend they would have come forward and stated this to police. Kunal Singh had to go out with his friends that night and they had to sleep over at the Singhs house. Kunal told his friends.. via phone... that he was not feeling well and that his sister Neelma wanted a quiet night in and for them not to go over to the house. Max Sica was suppose to go over that night but Neelma had also told him that she was not feeling well and that he should not go over that night. What if the person or persons at the door that night were the killer/s? What if they made sure no one would go to the house and told Neelma and Kunal to make the calls? and what if they were known to the Singh children?

The threatening calls Mr Singh recieved not long before the children were killed is another factor. The threat heard in court by two Fijian men was truly chilling vile and vicious.

There was also testimony from two women who lived near that Singhs at that time. These women stated that they were going for a power walk or jog at about 5.30am on Tuesday....day bodies were discovered... they stated that when this man looked up and saw them, he ran up a hill and jumped a fence. These women gave police a description of this man and a comfit sketch was made. No one knew about this until Max Sica got charged and arrested for the murders. Mind you, the description given of this man was not Max Sica. Who was this man? why did he not come forward? why was his comfit sketch never aired on any media station or put in any newspaper as to try to find out who he was?

These are just a few points of consideration. All facts not fiction. If you can read this blog, please do so. It will give you a better understanding of this case and some facts (heard in court especially in the committal phase) that no one ever bothered to print.

Police evidence reveals accused killer Max Sica crying during walk-through of Singh home following murder

ACCUSED killer Max Sica broke down and couldn't continue when police took him on a walk through of the Singh siblings's murder scene, a court has seen.

A Supreme Court in Brisbane had earlier seen taped video recording of an interview between lead investigating officer Joe Zitny and Sica at the Petrie police station, on April 22, 2003.

It then saw a video tape of Sica and police, led by Det Zitny, going through the Singh home on April 25, 2003.

The trial has heard Sica discovered the bodies of the Singh children in an ensuite spa bath at their Bridgemen Downs home, in north Brisbane, on April 22, 2003.

Police took him through the house on April 25, 2003, to tell them about his movements before locating the bodies.

Sica told police he could smell something like a barbecue or cooking brussel sprouts when he was in the house.

"It was like brussel sprouts, the smell of food you don't want to eat," he said.

Sica clearly gave details of what he had done in the lead up to finding the bodies but as the walk through continued in the upstairs area the jury saw Sica become more and more upset until a sobbing Sica couldn't continue.

Police ended the walk through and sent Sica home with his father.

Sica, 42, has pleaded not guilty to murdering Neelma Singh, 24, Kunal Singh, 18, and Sidhi Singh, 12, at Bridgeman Downs, on April 21, 2003.

Later, the court heard recording of Juvenile Aid officers talking with Sica's son Daniel Sica, then aged 11, who was with him when he went to the Singh home, on April 22, 2003.

The court has heard Sica sent Daniel, his daughter Britney and their cousin to the car before he went into the Singh home.

Daniel told the officers Sica had collected him and his sister and friend on Monday morning (April 21) after Sica had not been able to get them the previous day.

The court heard Daniel share details about the Monday they spent with Sica, including getting breakfast and videos, playing, and having dinner with Sica's girlfriend Nicole (Zwoerner).

Daniel said Sica told him Nicole was coming over and that he was now just friends with his old girlfriend Nim (Neelma Singh).

The next day Sica took Daniel, Britney and a friend to the Singh house to see if Neelma and Sidhi wanted to go to a movie with them.

Daniel told police that the relationship between Sica and Neelma was "pretty good" and they were friends.

He said Sica had told Neelma on Sunday that they might be going to the movies on the Tuesday.

When they couldn't raise anyone at the Singh house, Sica and Daniel went to the back of the house given, and tried the back door screen door.

Daniel said he had been able to see two cars in the garage and Neelma's dog Bujo was there.

He also looked in the kitchen window but couldn't see anyone.

Sica had given Daniel his keys and told him and the other children to go back to the car and sit in the car.

Daniel said he did think something was wrong because the Singhs weren't answering the phone or a knock at the door.

Sica then went into the house and Daniel and the two girls went back to the car on the street

Sica had come back crying with the dog, Bujo, and told Daniel to take the dog.

"When dad came back he was crying and his eyes were red. He was calling someone, I didn't know who. Four or five minutes after a police car drove up and dad was talking to them," Daniel Sica told police.

He said his dad had been in the house for about 10, 15 or 20 minutes before coming out.

Daniel said he and the girls waited about half an hour and their aunt came to get them.

The trial before Justice John Byrne continues.

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

This walk through was done three days after Max Sica discovered the bodies of the Singh children.

Max Sica did not ask for a lawyer even at this stage.

After leaving the walk through with his father, he was taken to hospital for he was truly in a bad state.

Det. Zitny would have you believe that he faked his grief.

It was stated in court by Archana Singh (sister of the deceased) that on the Easter Sunday night she was having an internet conversation with her sister Neelma. At about 830pm Neelma told her sister (via chat) that there was someone at the door and she had to go answer. Neelma did not log back onto the internet after this incident. Till this very day, no one knows who was at the door that night at that time. I would think that if it was a family member or friend, they would have come forward and stated that they had seen the Singh children that night.

What if it was the killer/s at the door? Kunal Singh had to go out with his friends that night and his friends were suppose to sleep over. He rang his friends and told them that he was not feeling well and that his sister Neelma wanted a quiet night in, so he asked them not to go over.

This is a factor which has been playing on my mind. Maybe they were told not to let anyone come to the house by their killer/s. Kunal was suppose to go out and his friends sleep over, Max Sica was meant to go over and then Neelma told him that she was not feeling well and for him not to. Coincidence? maybe... but still makes one think.

http://max-sica.blogspot.com.au/2010/04/alleged-sex-offence-charges.html

http://max-sica.blogspot.com.au/2010/04/common-sense.html

Sica blames God for three murders

Sica blames God for three murders

Christine Flatley

April 16, 2012 - 1:57PM

Accused murderer Max Sica told police that God was responsible for the deaths of three siblings found in a spa bath, a court has heard.

Sica, 42, is currently on trial in the Supreme Court in Brisbane for the murders of his ex-girlfriend Neelma Singh, 24, and her siblings Kunal, 18, and Sidhi, 12.

Their bodies were found in a spa at their Bridgeman Downs home in April 2003.

Mr Sica told police he found the trio when he went to the home on April 22.

The crown alleges he killed them, cleaned up after himself and then called in the deaths in an attempt to deflect the blame from himself.

Police did extensive recorded interviews with Sica, some of which were played to the jury today.

In one interview, lead investigating officer Joe Zitny asked Mr Sica who he thought was responsible for the deaths.

"God," Sica replied.

"What if I say to you that you're responsible for what happened in that house?" Det Zitny asked.

"I'd say no," Mr Sica said.

The trial continues.

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

SICA BLAMES GOD....yes after hours of questioning and police asking him who do you think would have done such a thing etc etc etc...AND the police letting him realize they were pointing the finger at him..... he answered GOD.

Presumption of innocence even at the beginning of this whole saga was never on Det. Zitny`s mind. He was the lead Detective, (and in my opinion), he wanted results the quick and easy way.

Nine yrs ago when Max Sica discovered the bodies of the Singh children, all the facts, details and issues regarding the Singh family were not made public yet. Max Sica never went to Neelma or Mrs Singh or anyone else in the family and ask them to tell him about the familys and moreso Mr Singhs private and sordid details. It was mainly Mrs Singh that would tell Max Sica about what her husband was up to and how he made her have sex with other men etc etc. She told other people about her issues with Mr Singh as well.

Max Sica was called by members of the Singh family whenever there was some sort of domestic violence issues at the Singh home on more than one occasion.

On the day he discovered the bodies, he could not believe that out of all the times he had been there for them in times of need, he was not there when their lives were brutally taken from them. For if he was there on that day, he would risk losing his own life in an attempt to save theirs.

Mr Singh did not like Max Sica just because of the reasons he states, he did not like him because Max Sica was made aware by Mr Singh`s own family members about the man he truly is. Not the image of a religious, caring family man he wanted others to perceive him as. He also didnt like Max Sica because he said he was divorced and had children. Well only after the deaths of his children was it known that he had been married before and had children from that marriage. He has not spoken to them in about 30yrs. He was having an affair with his present wife at the time and left his first wife and family to start up a new one. His present wife was also married to someone else and had children from that marriage. Funny how being so religious only suits you when its not about yourself.

Sometimes you dont have to have a criminal record to be a true criminal. some people who dont have a criminal record..by law.., commit crimes of all sorts and get away with it with a clean image.

http://max-sica.blogspot.com.au/2010/04/alleged-sex-offence-charges.html

http://max-sica.blogspot.com.au/2010/04/common-sense.html

Tearful accused killer Max Sica denied kiling Singh children, court told

ACCUSED killer Max Sica tearfully denied to police that he had murdered the three Singh siblings, asking detectives why he would do such a thing, a court has heard.

A Supreme Court jury in Brisbane was watching a recorded video interview between Sica and chief investigating officer Detective Sgt Joe Zitny which took place at the Petrie police station on the night of April 22, 2003.

In the interview, Sica told his version of how he found the bodies of Neelma Singh, 24, Kunal Singh, 18, and Sidhi Singh, 12, at Bridgeman Downs, in Brisbane's north, on April 22, 2003.

Follow the Max Sica trial day-by-day here

Sica, 42, has pleaded not guilty to murdering the three Singh siblings on April 21, 2003.

At one stage, Sica was asked if he had anything to so with the killings.

"Why would I do this? You tell me. I wouldn't do something like this," Sica said.

He was then asked if he knew who was behind the killings.

"If I knew I wouldn't be here, I would be there," Sica said, indicating he might have taken the law into his own hands.

Det Zitny asked Sica why he had gone back upstairs to where the bodies were after initially going downstairs to ring 000.

"I didn't believe it. I wanted to make sure, I wanted to see them once more," an openly sobbing Sica said.

Det Zitny asked: "To see them?"

"Yeah, to see them," Sica replied.

Earlier, Sica told Det Zitny the last time he saw Neelma was about 5pm at Sica's home in Trouts Road at Stafford, on Sunday, April 20.

However, Sica said despite having a new girlfriend he remained in a sexual relationship with Neelma and they had sex whenever they could - in a car or at her home.

He told detectives he had sex with Neelma about six times in the three weeks after her parents had gone to Fiji but he was supposed to be incognito because Neelma was afraid Kunal Singh would tell their father Vijay who didn't like him (Sica).

Sica also repeated his version of how he found the bodies of the Singh children.

He said he had his two children and niece with him when he arrived at Singh's home at about 2.20pm on April 22, 2003.

Sica couldn't get anyone to answer the door and he tried the home phone and no one answered

He told police he went to the back of the Singh's house and saw the screen door was unlocked and found the door also unlocked.

Sica said the Singh family's dog ran out and he gave his son his comb, phone and "smokes" and sent the children back to the car.

"If there was someone in the house I didn't want the kids around," Sica said.

He told detectives he armed himself with a large wooden spoon from the garage and then went inside to check on the house.

Sica had eventually gone upstairs and he went into Neelma's room where he saw the dog sniffing blood.

He then went to the main bedroom, opposite Neelma's room, as he heard the tap running in the ensuite.

Sica said he saw blankets piled up in the spa and he used the large spoon to lift them up.

It was then he touched Neelma's hand and he realised she was dead.

Sica said he could also see Kunal and Sidhi in the spa.

The trial before Justice John Byrne will resume on Monday.

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

This is the very first interview police had with Max Sica on the very day he had discovered the bodies. Not only was he in shock and disbelief, but he was questioned for many hours that day and had to have an idea that police were thinking he might be the murderer.

I do not have a problem with police doing their job and interviewing all involved to try and solve a case, what i do have a problem with is the bias, tunnel vision investigation that took place from the very start. Max Sica was the prime suspect hours after discovering the bodies. Police did not bother then, to seek all other avenues which were apparent and in their face at that time.

Max Sica knew these people and when he went into that house he knew who lived there at the time. When he entered the bathroom and saw the spa covered with bedding etc, he used a wooden spoon to lift the covers and he saw who and how many people were in that spa. Even their own photos taken at the crime scene clearly shows this and they did not know these people at all. There are many conflicting statements of how many bodies could or could not be seen and this is from police, ambulance workers etc.

Max Sica asks police why he would do such a thing because he is innocent and is utterly shocked when he realizes that he could be accused of committing such a horrible crime. This crime is no crime of passion or a fight which got out of control, these kids were brutally tortured and murdered.

People who lived next to the Singh house at the time did come forward to say they heard screams, what sounded like gun shots, etc. This was not at the time police believe they were killed, this was Monday night and just after midnight into the Tuesday morning.

Im sure that each one of us have done things in life which we are not proud of, who more, who less. Max Sica may be guilty of some things which he is not proud of, but it certainly doesnt make him automatically guilty of murder.

MAKES YOU THINK......

These are witness statements from 2 workers who were working together at the house beside the Singh home.

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

Mr Hurley`s statement:

Renderer Troy Edmond Hurley told the court he was working at a house next to the Singh's home on April 22, 2003, when he saw a car pull up and a man get out and spend "10 to 15 minutes" around the front of the house.

At that time he had not seen any children with the man but he had only glanced over his shoulder.

Mr Hurley said he later saw the man with two children, a boy and a girl, on the driveway and they went around the side of the house. The man had tried two doors at the back of the house.

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

Mr Moore`s statement:

Mr Di Carlo asked Mr Moore if he saw the man and the children knock on the front door and then walk up the back of the garage and look around.

"No, the man went up the driveway and to the back of the house," Mr Moore said.

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

These two men were working at the same house on that day, each man has a different version of what they saw and heard on the day. Which version do you think the police were more in favour of?

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

Witness statements from people who lived close to the Singh house at the time of their deaths.

She told the court she had been away for the Easter weekend and returned home at about lunchtime on the Monday.

In the afternoon she had a barbecue for some friends and about 7.30 or 8.30 they heard what sounded like two gunshots or two cracks of a whip.

"Did you also hear a blood curdling scream?" Mr Di Carlo asked.

Ms Bliss replied that she had and it seemed to be a female.

She told Mr Di Carlo she had not called police but later spoke with them after an unusual incident while she was walking with a friend.

Ms Bliss said she was walking on a bike path at about 5.30am when she saw a man dressed in work clothes.

The man looked at them and ran off before jumping a fence.

Ms Bliss told Mr Di Carlo she was shown a photo board but had not recognised anyone and had also helped police with a comfit photograph.

Julie Anne Hicks and her then boyfriend Gary Paul Ball went to a barbecue at Ms Bliss and her husband Jeffrey Bliss's home at Grey Gum Close.

Ms Hicks said it had been very quiet and dark and she assumed most people were still away for Easter.

She told Mr Di Carlo she heard what she thought was a whip crack but after talking with the others they decided it was a gunshot.

Ms Hicks said she also recalled hearing a loud scream.

"I have described it as blood curdling. It made the hairs on the back of my neck stand up. I thought it was female and it seemed to go on for about 10 seconds," she added.

Ms Hicks told Mr Di Carlo that at the time it had terrified her and she had expected to hear sirens but she didn't.

"We didn't know where it came from ......we had no sense of direction," she said.

Ms Hicks said she could put the time as being dark but before 8.30pm when she had gone inside to watch a television show.

Mr Ball told Mr Di Carlo he went to the Hendra police station the next day because he had concerns about some noises he heard.

He said between 8pm and 8.30pm he heard two to three short sharp shots.

"In between (the shots) I heard a scream......I had no idea where it came from," he said.

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

Alicia Gwyneth Frances was the fourth witness to tell of hearing a scream in the area of the Singh family home on the night of April 21-22, 2003, but she placed it at a later time than evidence given by three others.

The court has heard police believe Neelma Singh, 24, Kunal Singh, 18, and Sidhi Singh, 12, were murdered at their Bridgeman Downs, in Brisbane's north, late on April 20 or early on April 21, 2003.

The Crown today called Mrs Frances for cross examination by barrister Sam Di Carlo, for Sica, on what she heard early on Tuesday, April 22, 2003.

Mrs Frances told the court she was asleep in her home in Knightsbridge Place, Bridgeman Down, which had a view of the Singhs' home in Grass Tree Close.

She told Mr Di Carlo she remembered being awoken by a screaming sound she believed was coming from the direction of Grass Tree Close.

"I opened my eyes and woke up....I physically got up and to look at the alarm clock," Mrs Frances said, explaining the clock was on her husband's side of the bed.

She said it was either 12.20 or 12.28 because she was not wearing her glasses and had trouble telling the difference between the "8" and the "0".

"So there was no guessing about the time," Mr Di Carlo said.

"Absolutely no," Mrs Frances replied.

Mr Di Carlo asked Mrs Frances if what she had heard could be described as "guttural".

"I believe I heard a scream. I thought it was blood curdling.......I felt it was a female," Mrs Frances said.

She said she went to the back of her house and stood there for 10 to 15 minutes while her husband had gone downstairs to check.

In re-examination, prosecutor Brendan Campbell asked if while she was standing in the backroom Mrs Frances heard anything else.

She said the initial noise sounded like it was carried on the wind but she also heard some other noise near the house.

Mr Campbell also asked how she was certain what day she heard the noises.

"I am going on what I said to police at that initial time. I am using that information and I know it happened at that time, it was Easter, it was that period of time," she replied.

The court had earlier heard evidence from three witnesses who were at a barbecue in a house near Grass Tree Close on April 21 and they heard a scream at about 8.30 that night

Paramedics, Peter Billin and Ryan Reddy told the court they were called to Grass Tree Close where they had been told there were three bodies.

Mr Billin told the court he could see a woman and a younger girl in the spa and he had tried to find any signs of life in either body.

He said he could find no signs of life and both had signs of rigor mortis.

Mr Reddy said he saw two bodies in the bath and another apparently submerged except for a foot protruding.

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

Above you can read that Mr Reddy saw the foot of a third body in the spa bath when he arrived at the scene of the crime that day. Below is the statement of Officer Green and what HE SAID, HE SAW, when he arrived at the scene of the crime that day

Senior Constable Green said he saw only two bodies submerged in the murky water of the spa, which had been left running, upon first walking into the ensuite.

He said there was bedding dumped on the bathroom floor, which was wet where the spa had overflowed.

Some of the bedding had been placed in the spa with the bodies and at least two black pillows were partially submerged in the water, he said.

Senior Constable Green said he discovered the third body - being Kunal's - in the water only after returning to the ensuite a second time and moving a black pillow resting on the edge of the spa and then "leaning right over" the foot of the bath.

"At that stage I could see past the female body and see another set of legs wedged under her," he said.

Senior Constable Green said he could not see a male foot protruding from the spa, or a male knee visible beneath the water, upon his initial observation of the scene.

"I remember them being wedged further down," he said.

But he conceded parts of the third body were visible at the time after being shown crime scene photographs when cross-examined by Mr Sica's defence barrister Sam Di Carlo.

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

I am not trying to prove anything here, but sometimes it just boggles the mind how there can be different versions by different people of the same event.

Like i have stated before on this blog, the police only alledge that the crimes were committed late Sunday very early Monday because Max Sica was in his bed sleeping at that time, thus to them he had no tangiable alibi.

The coroner cannot establish time of death because of factors involved in the crime itself. He cannot really even establish the exact murder weapons used to kill them for there was more than one.

Think about it yourselves and truly see what all the evidence and facts are truly saying about this case.