Even though I walk through the darkest valley, I fear no evil; for you are with me; your rod and your staff-they comfort me. PSALM 23:4
Investigations into the Singh triple murders are still ongoing, despite the end of the commital hearings last year. It was pointed out by the defence that many enquiries had not been carried out properly and/or exhausted and that the crown case against his client, (alledged murderer Massimo Sica) was circumstancialy weak, despite the amount of funds and years spent on the investigation.
It appears that the QPS are trying to tie up some loose ends before the trial, which is set for january next year.
Tuesday, June 21, 2011
Wednesday, May 25, 2011
TODAYS HEADINGS....
ACCUSED triple murderer Max Sica had a District Court trial on completely unrelated matters delisted today.
Lawyers for Mr Sica had hoped to have the unrelated matters heard in November to clear them before his trial on three counts of murder.
Mr Sica is charged with the murders of Neelma Singh, 24, her brother Kunal, 18, and sister Sidhi, 12. They were found dead at their parents' Bridgeman Downs home on April 22, 2003.
He was committed to stand trial for their murders last October and will plead not guilty when the minimum 15 weeks trial starts in the Supreme Court in the week of January 30.
However, Mr Sica is also facing unrelated charges in the District Court which had been listed for trial on November 14.
His lawyer Kerry Douglas made a submission to the District Court today, that the trial listing remain.
Ms Douglas said her client was clearly innocent of the charges and should have them out of the way before going to trial on the murder charges.
She argued there had been a lot of pre-trial publicity about the murders with more than 14 million hits combined on the internet about "Max Sica" and the Singh murders.
An acquittal on the District Court charges would lessen the publicity on the Supreme Court charges, she argued.
Ms Douglas said Mr Sica had also been denied a chance to see his five year old daughter because of the District Court charges.
She said she was unable to get Legal Aid and Mr Sica's family were unable pay so she would be appearing in the District Court trial without a barrister.
Prosecutor Todd Fuller,SC, said he opposed the application for the trial to go ahead because it was always planned for the more serious charges _ the murder allegations _ to be heard first.
Judge Milton Griffin,SC, said he accepted Ms Douglas passionately believed her client would be acquitted but if the reverse was to happen it could have a deterimental publicity impact on the murder trial.
He added it was unfortunate Mr Sica had not been able to see his daughter.
Judge Griffin said, however, it appeared the best course would be for the murder trial to go first and he would delist the District Court matters.
The District Court matters will be mentioned in September when Ms Douglas is to give the Crown notice of alibi.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is what Max Sica`s wife has written on her facebook page. She is listed as shivanjani sica on facebook. For those who would like to read about all she has to say on her husbands case, please feel free to visit her facebook page.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I alone know the plans i have for you, plans to bring you prosperity and not disaster, plans to bring about the future you hope for. Then you will call to me. You will come and pray to me, and you will find me because you will seek me with all your heart.
Yes, i say, you will find me, i will restore you and i will restore you to your land. I will gather from every country and from every place which i have scattered you and i will bring you back to the land from which i had sent you away into exile. I, THE LORD, have spoken.
(jeremiah 29..11)
For the Lord says..above all i wish you health and prosperity. (amen)
Max Sica`s "Unrelated", "Seperate", "Second" Matter/Court Trial Date De-listed
Judge Milton Griffin, SC delisted Massimo (max) Sica`s unrelated District Court Trial Date, which was originally set for November 14th of this year relating to 20 alleged child sex offences of an underaged girl between 2004 and 2008.
Solicitor, Kerry Smith Douglas made submissions before Judge Griffin that the district court matter remain and be heard before the supreme court matter (re:triple singh muders) which has been listed for trial in January 2012. It is estimated that the murder trial will last at least anywhere between 15 weeks to 6 months. Defence barrister Mr Sam Di Carlo, officially withdrew from the sex case this year.
Miss Smith argued that the pre trial publicity was substantial in realtion to her clients name (max sica) reaching records of over a million, and that having the district court trial date remain or be advanced so that his name may be cleared and the publicity reduced. She also indicated as she has done so, in the past, that her client is clearly innocent and she says this after reviewing the alibi witness testimony and the numerous number of records which the defence will be able to provide in relation to the unrelated 20 child sex charges (and not 18 as the courier mail reported).
Judge Griffin accepted Miss Douglas passionately believes her client will be aquitted but said if the opposite were to happen, it would have a detremental impact on the publicity aspect on the murder trial.
Crown prosecuter Todd Fuller, SC opposed the application for the trial to go ahead because - "it was always planed for the more serious charges - the murder allegations - to be heard first. The court also heard about Max not having access to his daughter (s) since being in custody. Prosecuter Fuller stated that it appeared Mrs Shivanjani Sica had made an application to the general manager of Arthur Gorrie Correctional Centre for her daughter to see her father, who is on bail on the unrelated sex offences.
The Corrective Services refused the application on the grounds that her reasons were non urgent, non compelling and that it was in the best interest of the child.
Judge Griffin was empathetic and questioned why it would be so, especially in a heavily supervised and monitered area such as Arthur Gorrie Remand Centre. Miss Douglas also told the court, (of which the DPP were unaware and suggested as the next course of action for Mrs Sica) that the application was reviewed by the deputy commissioner of corrective services and custodial operations who agreed with the decision of the general manager of Arthur Gorrie and would not accept any further applications for another year.
Judge Griffin agreed with the DPP that the sex matters be heard after the murders, despite the defensive postion of the strength of the crown case and alibi witness testimony accompanying records. He has set the matter for a mention in September of this year when Miss Douglas is expected to give a notice of alibi to the crown, which the defence failed to provide within 21 days of the end of the committal proceedings last year.
My name is Shivanjani Sica, many of you know me as Shiv, Shiv Sica or Shiv Kumar. The truth is i have a lot of storys to share with you. Unfortunately my hands are tied, because freedom of speech is not what we think it is......... I will give you an example...police not once came and spoke to me prior to Max`s arrest in relation to the sex case. The complainent child had a friend who made allegations of a similar nature against her stepfather. This matter was investigated by police at the same time as the complainent child in Max Sica`s sex charges. If i were to tell you of what i have seen and experienced as a compasionate human being and not as the wife, partner, mother (of max sica`s child) of Max Sica, i would be arrested within half an hour of speaking out the truth. I hope that you will all keep an opened mind and follow what i will be putting up on my facebook page because i have sat by and watched this injustice grow for the last 8 years. The QPS and the DPP have put obstacle after obstacle along our way during this battle.
The Child Protection and Investigation Unit (CPIU) from Queensland Police Services (QPS) went and questioned the partner of the defendent in the complainent child friends investigation but failed to do the same in my husbands matter.
This is despite one of the crowns main and first witness telling them constantly that Max`s partner Shiv Sica (i) was with him basically 24hrs a day. This could be proven through alibi testimonies of over 50 people, including the homicides squad own surveillance material. I must remind everyone this would have been better for the crown case because i did not know the details of the childs allegations and or particulars of the charges. For example...all they had to do was come and say to me..what do you remember about your Armidale trip, Nanango trip, complaintent childs birthday 2007 and many other charges because the complaintent child chose dates which were highly relevant to me. This will be proven through a number of records which i can tell you exist, just alone from memory. p.s. i must inform you i myself have not seen any of these records apart from photos and videos i have in my possession. The rest of the records will be subpoenaed by the crown after a list of alibi witnesses and records has been submitted in September this year.
Lord I pray that you will look after Max and i thank you for the victory that you have in store for me and my family. We pray for the truth to come out for despite what anyone thinks you KNOW the truth and you are in charge of our life, not MEN. In Jesus name Amen
Lawyers for Mr Sica had hoped to have the unrelated matters heard in November to clear them before his trial on three counts of murder.
Mr Sica is charged with the murders of Neelma Singh, 24, her brother Kunal, 18, and sister Sidhi, 12. They were found dead at their parents' Bridgeman Downs home on April 22, 2003.
He was committed to stand trial for their murders last October and will plead not guilty when the minimum 15 weeks trial starts in the Supreme Court in the week of January 30.
However, Mr Sica is also facing unrelated charges in the District Court which had been listed for trial on November 14.
His lawyer Kerry Douglas made a submission to the District Court today, that the trial listing remain.
Ms Douglas said her client was clearly innocent of the charges and should have them out of the way before going to trial on the murder charges.
She argued there had been a lot of pre-trial publicity about the murders with more than 14 million hits combined on the internet about "Max Sica" and the Singh murders.
An acquittal on the District Court charges would lessen the publicity on the Supreme Court charges, she argued.
Ms Douglas said Mr Sica had also been denied a chance to see his five year old daughter because of the District Court charges.
She said she was unable to get Legal Aid and Mr Sica's family were unable pay so she would be appearing in the District Court trial without a barrister.
Prosecutor Todd Fuller,SC, said he opposed the application for the trial to go ahead because it was always planned for the more serious charges _ the murder allegations _ to be heard first.
Judge Milton Griffin,SC, said he accepted Ms Douglas passionately believed her client would be acquitted but if the reverse was to happen it could have a deterimental publicity impact on the murder trial.
He added it was unfortunate Mr Sica had not been able to see his daughter.
Judge Griffin said, however, it appeared the best course would be for the murder trial to go first and he would delist the District Court matters.
The District Court matters will be mentioned in September when Ms Douglas is to give the Crown notice of alibi.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is what Max Sica`s wife has written on her facebook page. She is listed as shivanjani sica on facebook. For those who would like to read about all she has to say on her husbands case, please feel free to visit her facebook page.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I alone know the plans i have for you, plans to bring you prosperity and not disaster, plans to bring about the future you hope for. Then you will call to me. You will come and pray to me, and you will find me because you will seek me with all your heart.
Yes, i say, you will find me, i will restore you and i will restore you to your land. I will gather from every country and from every place which i have scattered you and i will bring you back to the land from which i had sent you away into exile. I, THE LORD, have spoken.
(jeremiah 29..11)
For the Lord says..above all i wish you health and prosperity. (amen)
Max Sica`s "Unrelated", "Seperate", "Second" Matter/Court Trial Date De-listed
Judge Milton Griffin, SC delisted Massimo (max) Sica`s unrelated District Court Trial Date, which was originally set for November 14th of this year relating to 20 alleged child sex offences of an underaged girl between 2004 and 2008.
Solicitor, Kerry Smith Douglas made submissions before Judge Griffin that the district court matter remain and be heard before the supreme court matter (re:triple singh muders) which has been listed for trial in January 2012. It is estimated that the murder trial will last at least anywhere between 15 weeks to 6 months. Defence barrister Mr Sam Di Carlo, officially withdrew from the sex case this year.
Miss Smith argued that the pre trial publicity was substantial in realtion to her clients name (max sica) reaching records of over a million, and that having the district court trial date remain or be advanced so that his name may be cleared and the publicity reduced. She also indicated as she has done so, in the past, that her client is clearly innocent and she says this after reviewing the alibi witness testimony and the numerous number of records which the defence will be able to provide in relation to the unrelated 20 child sex charges (and not 18 as the courier mail reported).
Judge Griffin accepted Miss Douglas passionately believes her client will be aquitted but said if the opposite were to happen, it would have a detremental impact on the publicity aspect on the murder trial.
Crown prosecuter Todd Fuller, SC opposed the application for the trial to go ahead because - "it was always planed for the more serious charges - the murder allegations - to be heard first. The court also heard about Max not having access to his daughter (s) since being in custody. Prosecuter Fuller stated that it appeared Mrs Shivanjani Sica had made an application to the general manager of Arthur Gorrie Correctional Centre for her daughter to see her father, who is on bail on the unrelated sex offences.
The Corrective Services refused the application on the grounds that her reasons were non urgent, non compelling and that it was in the best interest of the child.
Judge Griffin was empathetic and questioned why it would be so, especially in a heavily supervised and monitered area such as Arthur Gorrie Remand Centre. Miss Douglas also told the court, (of which the DPP were unaware and suggested as the next course of action for Mrs Sica) that the application was reviewed by the deputy commissioner of corrective services and custodial operations who agreed with the decision of the general manager of Arthur Gorrie and would not accept any further applications for another year.
Judge Griffin agreed with the DPP that the sex matters be heard after the murders, despite the defensive postion of the strength of the crown case and alibi witness testimony accompanying records. He has set the matter for a mention in September of this year when Miss Douglas is expected to give a notice of alibi to the crown, which the defence failed to provide within 21 days of the end of the committal proceedings last year.
My name is Shivanjani Sica, many of you know me as Shiv, Shiv Sica or Shiv Kumar. The truth is i have a lot of storys to share with you. Unfortunately my hands are tied, because freedom of speech is not what we think it is......... I will give you an example...police not once came and spoke to me prior to Max`s arrest in relation to the sex case. The complainent child had a friend who made allegations of a similar nature against her stepfather. This matter was investigated by police at the same time as the complainent child in Max Sica`s sex charges. If i were to tell you of what i have seen and experienced as a compasionate human being and not as the wife, partner, mother (of max sica`s child) of Max Sica, i would be arrested within half an hour of speaking out the truth. I hope that you will all keep an opened mind and follow what i will be putting up on my facebook page because i have sat by and watched this injustice grow for the last 8 years. The QPS and the DPP have put obstacle after obstacle along our way during this battle.
The Child Protection and Investigation Unit (CPIU) from Queensland Police Services (QPS) went and questioned the partner of the defendent in the complainent child friends investigation but failed to do the same in my husbands matter.
This is despite one of the crowns main and first witness telling them constantly that Max`s partner Shiv Sica (i) was with him basically 24hrs a day. This could be proven through alibi testimonies of over 50 people, including the homicides squad own surveillance material. I must remind everyone this would have been better for the crown case because i did not know the details of the childs allegations and or particulars of the charges. For example...all they had to do was come and say to me..what do you remember about your Armidale trip, Nanango trip, complaintent childs birthday 2007 and many other charges because the complaintent child chose dates which were highly relevant to me. This will be proven through a number of records which i can tell you exist, just alone from memory. p.s. i must inform you i myself have not seen any of these records apart from photos and videos i have in my possession. The rest of the records will be subpoenaed by the crown after a list of alibi witnesses and records has been submitted in September this year.
Lord I pray that you will look after Max and i thank you for the victory that you have in store for me and my family. We pray for the truth to come out for despite what anyone thinks you KNOW the truth and you are in charge of our life, not MEN. In Jesus name Amen
Thursday, May 19, 2011
DETRIMENTAL PUBLICITY........
LAWYERS for accused triple murderer Max Sica today failed in a bid to have his trial on other unrelated charges to be brought on as soon as possible.
There have been delays in setting up timelines for Mr Sica's after disputes about Legal Aid and which trial should go first.
Mr Sica is charged with the murders of Neelma Singh, 24, her brother Kunal, 18, and sister Sidhi, 12. They were found dead at their parents' Bridgeman Downs home on April 22, 2003. He was committed to stand trial for their murders last October.
Mr Sica has also been committed to stand trial on unrelated matters in the District Court.
The District Court in Brisbane heard today Mr Sica had effectively been in custody on remand since February 2009 on both the murder charges and the unrelated charges which involve allegations of sexual offences.
He has pleaded not guilty to both sets of charges. The court heard Mr Sica was arrested on sexual offences and got bail on them but was then arrested on the murder charges in late 2008.
He had been regarded as being on remand for both sets offfences since a magistrates court hearing in February, 2009. Mr Sica's lawyer Kerry Douglas said her client wanted to get the sexual matters dealt was as soon as possible.
Ms Douglas said because of the nature of the non-murder charges Mr Sica had been denied the right to see his daughter for 2-1/2 years.
"He is innocent and will be found not guilty of them and wants them out of the way as soon as possible.
"We can then attack the murder charges," she said.
Judge Milton Griffin, SC, said no one could say anyone would be found not guilty of anything. He said it would seem the best course would be for the District Court trial to follow the murder trial in the Supreme Court.
"Having an earlier trial will attract publicity that could be detrimental to Mr Sica's murder trial," he said.
However. Ms Douglas said her client wanted to abandon that submission and have a District Court trial as quickly as possible.
Judge Griffin said he would reject the request from Ms Douglas and relist the matter for May 23. He said at that stage dates may have been set for the Supreme Court trial.
THE JUDGE SAYS:
("Having an earlier trial will attract publicity that could be detrimental to Mr Sica's murder trial," he said.)
What more possible publicity could be detrimental to Mr Sica`s murder trial? The publicity on Mr Sica has been relentless since the beginning. Mr Sica has already been having a lengthy trial by media even before he was ever charged with anything.
Mr Sica was given bail on the sex charges only to then be arrested for the murder charges a couple of months later. They (at the time he was given bail) obviously did not think he was a threat, a flight risk, or anything else.
Mr Sica has never fled the jurisdiction since the discovery of the murders in April 2003. He has always co-operated with police and given them everything they asked for. He has been under constant surveillance in the way of.... phone taps, listening devices in his home, GPS tracking of his vehicles, police observing his moves and following him, and the use of undercover police. This all shortly after the murders in 2003.
This blog states certain facts and truths then logically all are entitled to their own opinion. This blog gives the whole picture and not only sensational headlines.
Innocence is a presumption for anyone who is charged with a crime, especially if one is truly innocent (as i believe Max Sica to be).
There have been delays in setting up timelines for Mr Sica's after disputes about Legal Aid and which trial should go first.
Mr Sica is charged with the murders of Neelma Singh, 24, her brother Kunal, 18, and sister Sidhi, 12. They were found dead at their parents' Bridgeman Downs home on April 22, 2003. He was committed to stand trial for their murders last October.
Mr Sica has also been committed to stand trial on unrelated matters in the District Court.
The District Court in Brisbane heard today Mr Sica had effectively been in custody on remand since February 2009 on both the murder charges and the unrelated charges which involve allegations of sexual offences.
He has pleaded not guilty to both sets of charges. The court heard Mr Sica was arrested on sexual offences and got bail on them but was then arrested on the murder charges in late 2008.
He had been regarded as being on remand for both sets offfences since a magistrates court hearing in February, 2009. Mr Sica's lawyer Kerry Douglas said her client wanted to get the sexual matters dealt was as soon as possible.
Ms Douglas said because of the nature of the non-murder charges Mr Sica had been denied the right to see his daughter for 2-1/2 years.
"He is innocent and will be found not guilty of them and wants them out of the way as soon as possible.
"We can then attack the murder charges," she said.
Judge Milton Griffin, SC, said no one could say anyone would be found not guilty of anything. He said it would seem the best course would be for the District Court trial to follow the murder trial in the Supreme Court.
"Having an earlier trial will attract publicity that could be detrimental to Mr Sica's murder trial," he said.
However. Ms Douglas said her client wanted to abandon that submission and have a District Court trial as quickly as possible.
Judge Griffin said he would reject the request from Ms Douglas and relist the matter for May 23. He said at that stage dates may have been set for the Supreme Court trial.
THE JUDGE SAYS:
("Having an earlier trial will attract publicity that could be detrimental to Mr Sica's murder trial," he said.)
What more possible publicity could be detrimental to Mr Sica`s murder trial? The publicity on Mr Sica has been relentless since the beginning. Mr Sica has already been having a lengthy trial by media even before he was ever charged with anything.
Mr Sica was given bail on the sex charges only to then be arrested for the murder charges a couple of months later. They (at the time he was given bail) obviously did not think he was a threat, a flight risk, or anything else.
Mr Sica has never fled the jurisdiction since the discovery of the murders in April 2003. He has always co-operated with police and given them everything they asked for. He has been under constant surveillance in the way of.... phone taps, listening devices in his home, GPS tracking of his vehicles, police observing his moves and following him, and the use of undercover police. This all shortly after the murders in 2003.
This blog states certain facts and truths then logically all are entitled to their own opinion. This blog gives the whole picture and not only sensational headlines.
Innocence is a presumption for anyone who is charged with a crime, especially if one is truly innocent (as i believe Max Sica to be).
Thursday, April 21, 2011
THIS STATEMENT IS FROM MAX SICA`S WIFE
My husband Massimo (Max) Sica has been in custody for two and a half years,charged with alleged rape and sex offences involving an underage girl and the triple murder of the Singh siblings. He is pleading "Not Guilty" on all
charges.
Despite Max being charged with these sex offences in October 2008 - prior to his arrest for murder - he is yet to face trial for the sex charges. It is my understanding that the authorities would prefer for the sex charges to go to trial after the murder trial - whenever that may be.
Today, on behalf of Max, I have instructed our solicitor, Kerry Smith-Douglas of Kerry Smith-Douglas Lawyers to do everything in her power to bring this sex offence case to trial as soon as possible.
Max has been waiting a long time to stand trial for these charges. Obviously I cannot discuss details of the case in this forum however I would ask people not to pass judgement until they know all of the facts, which have not been canvassed publicly and will be revealed in court. Max - like anyone else - deserves due process and his day in court.
Max's family and I believe that the trial for these sex related offences have been unnecessarily delayed and we are forced to question the motives of police. Is the trial of the alleged sex offences being delayed because prosecutors want the unresolved charges still hanging over Max's head when the murder trial starts?
My heart goes out to the Singh family. However the past eight years have also been a living nightmare for our family. Max has endured many years of trial through the media. We feel that so many obstacles have been put in the way and we ask for nothing more than the presumption of his innocence until proven guilty. He deserves his day in court and I am desperate to see the alleged sex offences be tried in court and not in the media.
Thank You for your time today.
charges.
Despite Max being charged with these sex offences in October 2008 - prior to his arrest for murder - he is yet to face trial for the sex charges. It is my understanding that the authorities would prefer for the sex charges to go to trial after the murder trial - whenever that may be.
Today, on behalf of Max, I have instructed our solicitor, Kerry Smith-Douglas of Kerry Smith-Douglas Lawyers to do everything in her power to bring this sex offence case to trial as soon as possible.
Max has been waiting a long time to stand trial for these charges. Obviously I cannot discuss details of the case in this forum however I would ask people not to pass judgement until they know all of the facts, which have not been canvassed publicly and will be revealed in court. Max - like anyone else - deserves due process and his day in court.
Max's family and I believe that the trial for these sex related offences have been unnecessarily delayed and we are forced to question the motives of police. Is the trial of the alleged sex offences being delayed because prosecutors want the unresolved charges still hanging over Max's head when the murder trial starts?
My heart goes out to the Singh family. However the past eight years have also been a living nightmare for our family. Max has endured many years of trial through the media. We feel that so many obstacles have been put in the way and we ask for nothing more than the presumption of his innocence until proven guilty. He deserves his day in court and I am desperate to see the alleged sex offences be tried in court and not in the media.
Thank You for your time today.
Monday, February 14, 2011
YOUR RIGHTS VS LIKE IT OR LUMP IT
ACCUSED triple murderer Max Sica could be required to represent himself during any future trials after telling a Brisbane court he did "not trust anyone" from Legal Aid to act for him.
Queensland's chief judge Patsy Wolfe this morning told Mr Sica he "would just have to represent himself" if he refused to accept funding and legal representation currently being offered by Legal Aid Queensland.
LAQ's Mark Griggs told the Brisbane District Court funding had been approved, and never previously refused, to Mr Sica,
He said the funding was on condition Mr Sica be represented by its own in-house legal team, understood to include highly-respected criminal lawyer Rob East.
Mr Sica has until today been represented by barrister Sam Di Carlo.
Mr Di Carlo this morning told the court Legal Aid had refused to provide funding to allow him to continue representing Mr Sica.
Start of sidebar. Skip to end of sidebar.
.End of sidebar. Return to start of sidebar.
"We've been unable to do anything because there is no funding (from LAQ)," Mr Di Carlo said.
"I won't be doing it pro-bono (or free of charge for Mr Sica anymore). I just can't."
Mr Sica then told Judge Wolfe: "I don't trust anyone from Legal Aid. I don't want anything to do with Legal Aid, your honour."
Judge Wolfe replied: "You will just have to represent yourself. You will just be doing it yourself."
Mr Sica was appearing before Judge Wolfe regarding a number of criminal charges scheduled for trial - possibly later this year which are unrelated to his alleged murder of Bridgeman Downs siblings of Neelma Singh, 24, her brother Kunal, 18, and sister Sidhi, 12, almost eight-years ago.
The Singh children were found dead in a spa at their parents' north Brisbane home, on April 22, 2003.
Less than two weeks ago the Brisbane Supreme Court told Mr Sica's murder trial could run for four months and that there was a chance he would seek only a judge to decide the case.
Mr Sica was committed to stand trial for their murders last October and will plead not guilty at trial.
The court was told that at this stage the murder trial would run 15 weeks and include 250 witnesses.
Judge Wolfe today granted Mr Di Carlo leave to withdraw from representing Mr Sica in the non-murder related offences.
However, Mr Di Carlo continues to be the lawyer of record for the murder offences.
It is understood that could be subject to change if funding is not granted allowing Mr Di Carlo to appear for Mr Sica at that trial.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Legal Aid are only willing to fund this case if you abide by their rules and only use a lawyer of their choice. Is this how it all works? You are charged with a horrible crime you did not commit, a crime that has been said to be the biggest criminal case in QLD history. The state have all the resources, back up house and funding at their disposition. Even if you have a lawyer willing to do the case with legal aid funding, legal aid still refuse to fund it.
This is not a minor petty case. A case of this magnitude and with all its complexities merits a legal representation of ones choice and trust. Unless you are a multi millionaire (because thats how much a case like this will cost you, millions)you are practically at the mercy they chose to give you.
Max Sica has been hounded by police and media for years before he was charged with this crime. His life has been a living hell from the day he discovered the bodies. The law has had years to build a circumstancial case and in the meantime have compiled tons of material regarding this case, the sheer volume of it all is astounding. How with all of this are you suppose to defend yourself when you dont even have the right to your own counsel? Its like you are pushed up against a wall until you are cornered and find no way out. Is this what one truly calls justice?
Wake up people for this will not only apply for Max Sica it will apply for all of us. Where are a persons rights? Just hope and pray that you or someone you know will never find themselves in a similar predicament. It is truly a travesty or justice and a position of power at its worse.
Queensland's chief judge Patsy Wolfe this morning told Mr Sica he "would just have to represent himself" if he refused to accept funding and legal representation currently being offered by Legal Aid Queensland.
LAQ's Mark Griggs told the Brisbane District Court funding had been approved, and never previously refused, to Mr Sica,
He said the funding was on condition Mr Sica be represented by its own in-house legal team, understood to include highly-respected criminal lawyer Rob East.
Mr Sica has until today been represented by barrister Sam Di Carlo.
Mr Di Carlo this morning told the court Legal Aid had refused to provide funding to allow him to continue representing Mr Sica.
Start of sidebar. Skip to end of sidebar.
.End of sidebar. Return to start of sidebar.
"We've been unable to do anything because there is no funding (from LAQ)," Mr Di Carlo said.
"I won't be doing it pro-bono (or free of charge for Mr Sica anymore). I just can't."
Mr Sica then told Judge Wolfe: "I don't trust anyone from Legal Aid. I don't want anything to do with Legal Aid, your honour."
Judge Wolfe replied: "You will just have to represent yourself. You will just be doing it yourself."
Mr Sica was appearing before Judge Wolfe regarding a number of criminal charges scheduled for trial - possibly later this year which are unrelated to his alleged murder of Bridgeman Downs siblings of Neelma Singh, 24, her brother Kunal, 18, and sister Sidhi, 12, almost eight-years ago.
The Singh children were found dead in a spa at their parents' north Brisbane home, on April 22, 2003.
Less than two weeks ago the Brisbane Supreme Court told Mr Sica's murder trial could run for four months and that there was a chance he would seek only a judge to decide the case.
Mr Sica was committed to stand trial for their murders last October and will plead not guilty at trial.
The court was told that at this stage the murder trial would run 15 weeks and include 250 witnesses.
Judge Wolfe today granted Mr Di Carlo leave to withdraw from representing Mr Sica in the non-murder related offences.
However, Mr Di Carlo continues to be the lawyer of record for the murder offences.
It is understood that could be subject to change if funding is not granted allowing Mr Di Carlo to appear for Mr Sica at that trial.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Legal Aid are only willing to fund this case if you abide by their rules and only use a lawyer of their choice. Is this how it all works? You are charged with a horrible crime you did not commit, a crime that has been said to be the biggest criminal case in QLD history. The state have all the resources, back up house and funding at their disposition. Even if you have a lawyer willing to do the case with legal aid funding, legal aid still refuse to fund it.
This is not a minor petty case. A case of this magnitude and with all its complexities merits a legal representation of ones choice and trust. Unless you are a multi millionaire (because thats how much a case like this will cost you, millions)you are practically at the mercy they chose to give you.
Max Sica has been hounded by police and media for years before he was charged with this crime. His life has been a living hell from the day he discovered the bodies. The law has had years to build a circumstancial case and in the meantime have compiled tons of material regarding this case, the sheer volume of it all is astounding. How with all of this are you suppose to defend yourself when you dont even have the right to your own counsel? Its like you are pushed up against a wall until you are cornered and find no way out. Is this what one truly calls justice?
Wake up people for this will not only apply for Max Sica it will apply for all of us. Where are a persons rights? Just hope and pray that you or someone you know will never find themselves in a similar predicament. It is truly a travesty or justice and a position of power at its worse.
Saturday, February 5, 2011
LENGTHY PERIOD OF LIVES VERSUS A LIFETIME IN JAIL.........
Accused triple murderer Max Sica could face judge-only trial
ACCUSED triple murderer Max Sica could seek a judge-only trial for the alleged murder of the Singh children, a court heard today.
In the Supreme Court in Brisbane, prosecutor Brendan Campbell presented an indictment charging Sica with the murders of Neelma Singh, 24, her brother Kunal, 18, and sister Sidhi, 12.
The Singh children were found dead in a spa at their parents' Bridegeman Downs home, on Brisbane's northside, on April 22, 2003.
Sica was committed to stand trial for their murders last October and will plead not guilty at trial.
Mr Campbell told the court at this stage the trial would run 15 weeks and include 250 witnesses.
Barrister Sam Di Carlo, for Sica, agreed the trial would run at least 15 weeks.
Justice John Byrne said the courts were trying to discourage such long trials.
"You are asking jurors to give up lengthy periods of their lives," Justice Byrne said.
Mr Di Carlo said there could be an application for a judge-only trial and Sica's case seemed to fit into the criteria needed for one.
He said the problem was police charged Sica after a seven-year investigation and there were seven years worth of witnesses.
"We have got it down from a possible 600 witnesses," Mr Di Carlo said.
Mr Campbell and Mr Di Carlo said they would have further talks in which some evidence might be dealt with as agreed facts.
Justice Byrne adjourned the matter until March 18 when the first steps are likely to be made to allocate the trial a date
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Judge Byrne says...."You are asking jurors to give up lengthy periods of their lives,"
what about the lengthy period Max Sica has been behind bars waiting for so called justice? It was ok for him to be persecuted all these years and be dragged through what i consider a living hell.
Max Sica was and has been the polices only suspect since day one,they didnt bother looking anywhere else, for them they had made up their minds there and then and have tried to build a case around that belief. There are so many injustices in this case that it makes the mind boggle.
As for the sex case, well it is a wonder that the charges were laid against him in the first place. If his name was not Max Sica, i dont think the case would have ever made it into a court room. (in this blog you will see for yourself the facts about the sex charges and other FACTS, notjust headlines)
It is a truly scary thought when anyone of you can be accused of a crime that you did not commit then have the whole weight of the law come down on you. Then you have to defend yourself and practically go broke in the process. Media play a huge role and i gather most people know how media operate, especially when a case of this magnitude presents itself to them. Read this blog, there is nothing fictitious about it, there are only facts, most of them from the committal hearings. This blog has not been written so you can think Max Sica is either guilty or innocent, it has been written so you can read ALL THE FACTS. Everyone will logicfally all have their own opinion, in the meantime Max Sica is fighting for his freedom, his life, and his innocence.
ACCUSED triple murderer Max Sica could seek a judge-only trial for the alleged murder of the Singh children, a court heard today.
In the Supreme Court in Brisbane, prosecutor Brendan Campbell presented an indictment charging Sica with the murders of Neelma Singh, 24, her brother Kunal, 18, and sister Sidhi, 12.
The Singh children were found dead in a spa at their parents' Bridegeman Downs home, on Brisbane's northside, on April 22, 2003.
Sica was committed to stand trial for their murders last October and will plead not guilty at trial.
Mr Campbell told the court at this stage the trial would run 15 weeks and include 250 witnesses.
Barrister Sam Di Carlo, for Sica, agreed the trial would run at least 15 weeks.
Justice John Byrne said the courts were trying to discourage such long trials.
"You are asking jurors to give up lengthy periods of their lives," Justice Byrne said.
Mr Di Carlo said there could be an application for a judge-only trial and Sica's case seemed to fit into the criteria needed for one.
He said the problem was police charged Sica after a seven-year investigation and there were seven years worth of witnesses.
"We have got it down from a possible 600 witnesses," Mr Di Carlo said.
Mr Campbell and Mr Di Carlo said they would have further talks in which some evidence might be dealt with as agreed facts.
Justice Byrne adjourned the matter until March 18 when the first steps are likely to be made to allocate the trial a date
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Judge Byrne says...."You are asking jurors to give up lengthy periods of their lives,"
what about the lengthy period Max Sica has been behind bars waiting for so called justice? It was ok for him to be persecuted all these years and be dragged through what i consider a living hell.
Max Sica was and has been the polices only suspect since day one,they didnt bother looking anywhere else, for them they had made up their minds there and then and have tried to build a case around that belief. There are so many injustices in this case that it makes the mind boggle.
As for the sex case, well it is a wonder that the charges were laid against him in the first place. If his name was not Max Sica, i dont think the case would have ever made it into a court room. (in this blog you will see for yourself the facts about the sex charges and other FACTS, notjust headlines)
It is a truly scary thought when anyone of you can be accused of a crime that you did not commit then have the whole weight of the law come down on you. Then you have to defend yourself and practically go broke in the process. Media play a huge role and i gather most people know how media operate, especially when a case of this magnitude presents itself to them. Read this blog, there is nothing fictitious about it, there are only facts, most of them from the committal hearings. This blog has not been written so you can think Max Sica is either guilty or innocent, it has been written so you can read ALL THE FACTS. Everyone will logicfally all have their own opinion, in the meantime Max Sica is fighting for his freedom, his life, and his innocence.
Monday, November 1, 2010
RECAP ON FEW THINGS AND ARTICLES
Sica sent nude photos of girlfriend to family: court
Amelia Bentley
August 26, 2009
The murdered Singh siblings, from left, Neelma, 24, Kunal, 18, and Sidhi, 12. Photo: Supplied
Accused killer Max Sica gave his then-girlfriend Neelma Singh drugs before taking nude photographs of her and emailing them to her family and friends, a court has heard.
Archana Pathik, the elder sister of Neelma, Kunal and Sidhi Singh whom Sica is charged with murdering in their home in 2003, began her evidence at a committal hearing in Brisbane Magistrates Court yesterday.
Dressed in a black suit and wearing black high heels, Mrs Pathik said she "never liked" Sica, who Neelma sought a restraining order against in a bid to get him to "stay away".
She said Neelma told her Sica admitted he was the one who emailed the nude photographs to her family and friends in late 2002.
She said Neelma confided that she used cocaine given to her by Sica before the photos were taken.
She said Neelma also told her that when her relationship with Sica broke down, he would hide behind a portable toilet on a property under construction near the Singh's home in Grass Tree Court, Bridgeman Downs, and watch their house.
"She was fearing, she was scared he was going to do something to her," Mrs Pathik told the court.
"She said he wanted to keep a close eye. He would park his car and walk and try and monitor the house and monitor movements at the house."
Sica's defence barrister Sam Di Carlo asked Mrs Pathik during cross-examination if she liked Sica.
"I never liked him," she said.
"Even from the beginning?" Mr Di Carlo asked.
"That's right," she said.
Mrs Pathik said it was Sica who phoned to tell her that Neelma, 24, Kunal, 18 and 12-year-old Sidhi were dead.
She said the news caused her to have a "severe asthma attack" and she believed Sica knew she suffered bad asthma and intended to trigger an attack.
"Because he's done that before," she said.
Mrs Pathik said when Sica made the call a police officer took his phone off him "because he was not meant to make that phone call".
Mr Di Carlo asked Mrs Pathik "Do you really really hate Max? Are you prepared to say anything to destroy him?"
Mrs Pathik replied "I choose not to answer that question".
Earlier yesterday Mrs Pathik gave evidence her sisters were scared in the days leading up to their murder.
She said when she saw her sister on April 18 2003, three days before the siblings' murder, Neelma was complaining of an injured arm which she was "really distressed" about.
"She said she slept on it, but I know my sister," she said.
"She kept holding onto her arm - I asked Sidhi (about it). She had a massive look of fear on her face."
When the family went to play soccer in a Brisbane park, Neelma kept "looking around, there was something there they were not disclosing to me".
At about 8pm on Easter Sunday Mrs Pathik said she was chatting to Neelma on an online chat site but the conversation ended when Neelma wrote "Someone is at the door, I have to go".
She told the court she tried to phone the family home the next day, Easter Monday, but got no answer.
During her evidence, Mrs Pathik asked Magistrate Brian Hine to direct Sica's barrister Sam Di Carlo not to smile at her.
"Could the defence please stop making faces and smiling. Mr Sam Di Carlo. And the public, thank you," she said, referring to sniggers coming from Sica's family in the public gallery.
Mr Di Carlo stood and objected.
"As far as I'm concerned whatever her name is, Archana, should compose herself. It's her behaviour, not mine, which needs to be questioned," he said.
Mrs Pathik, who did not live at the family home and was given the responsibility of being her siblings' "shadow" while her parents were away in Fiji on business at the time of the deaths, will continue her evidence this morning.
Notes.....Who was at the door 8pm Easter Sunday night 2003? Why did Archana not call her sister back that night? When Archana called on Monday and kept on getting no answer, was she not worried about her siblings? (especially when she says that her sisters were scared days before their muders, and Sidhi had a massive look of fear on her face when asked about Neelma`s sore arm) Why did she not call them on Tuesday and see if all was ok?
When Archana was asked by defence if she really hated Max and was prepared to say anything to destroy him, she chose not to answer that question. She also says that she hated Max from the very beginning.
About Neelma saying to her that she took drugs before those nude photos were taken of her, well in my opinion and if she (Neelma) actually did say that at all, she only did so as not to make it seem like she would have doneso otherwise. Neelma had actually phoned a member of the Sica family about the nude photos and never once mentioned she had taken drugs supplied to her by Max. You would think that she would have stated that particular detail, at least i would.
Even though Archana says Neelma told her that Max had admitted emailing the photos, Neelma continued seeing Max. Neelma did have a sore arm and on Thursday 17th April 2003 (5 days before murders discovered) she rung Max and asked if he could bring her some pain killers for a sore arm. Max`s father gave him some to bring to her and they were found at the Singh residence.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr V.J. Singh took his daughter Neelma with him to the Stafford Police Station to make a complaint about Max Sica. (this was not long after the confrontation he had with Sica in his home) In that taped confrontation Mr Singh is heard saying to Sica, "just you wait, you dont know what im capable of, you will see, you`re gonna get it"
The officer in his statement says that Mr Singh was doing all the talking and that his daughter seemed like she did not want to be there, he also says that when he asked to look at the text messages sent to her by Max, he found them to contain nothing threatening or allarming. Mr Singh also told the officer that he would be leaving the country and that he feared for his daughters safety etc, the officer had asked Mr Singh if he had neighbours which could keep an eye on his children to which he responded no. etc etc etc. Like i have already stated on this blog, if you as a parent, would think your children would be in any danger at all and from whatever or whomever, why would you leave them at all? I am a parent and i understand that people dont all think alike, but i would never leave my children if i would think such a thing. Mr Singh had also recieved threatening phone calls from Fiji, on these calls you can hear two men saying they know where his family lives and that he had f**** with their families and now they would f***** with his. Rape his daughters kill his family etc etc. He did not mention that to the officer at all.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Socked foot impressions with some amount of bleach found not on the 22nd of April but apparently some days later at crime scene. Max Sica`s footprints taken a year later. Alleged murder weapon found in garage, again not on the 22nd April but days later by Det Zitny.
Coroner states children could have died anywhere from three days up until few hours before they were found.
Police BELIEVE children died late Easter Sunday night early Monday morning. Max was asleep in his bed on Sunday night and from 7am Monday morning up until discovery of murders even police acknowledge that Max has firm alibi. In my opinion police continue saying they believe they died then because it is the only time Max (in their eyes) had no strong alibi, even though family members saw Max at home and in his bedroom.
When police questioned Mr Anil Lala, (an ex-boyfriend of Neelma`s and the person who had sent text wanting to meet with Neelma on the Easter Monday morning behind his old house) he told police he too was sleeping in his bed on Sunday night and that his parents were in their room and they were fine with what he told them.
On the Easter Monday night around 830pm and around 5 past midnight on Tuesday morning, people who lived near the Singh residence reported hearing screams and one woman in particular said she heard a bone chilling scream (from what seemed a young woman), that lasted around 3 to 4 minutes at around 5 past midnight Tuesday morning, she said it frightened her so much that she woke her husband and told him to look downstairs. She told this to police the day after the discovery of the murders.
Two women at 5.30am on Tuesday morning were taking a walk and saw a man walking down towards them from near the Singh residence, they stated that when this man looked up and saw them, he turned and ran the other way and jumped a fence. These women gave police a description of this man, the description was not of Max Sica.
A man by the name of Paul Surri was working in the area at that time, he had told police he had seen the youngest sibling (Sidhi Singh) outside the front door of her home on the Easter Monday, police told him he must have been mistaken, but he was adamant he saw her then and stated this in court at committal.
A friend of Kunal Singh (Jaga) went to police and conjured up a story about seeing Max with Kunal`s body over his shoulder on the Easter Sunday night at the Singh residence. Mr Jaga was made police informant and over the course of about 3 and a half months later, police started to question the validity of what Mr Jaga was telling them. He then confessed it was all a lie, he was never charged with obstruction of justice or purjury. At committal he had his rights (as not to incriminate himself) and answered questions put to him by defence with, "i do not wish to answer".
Ms Bowman (who police allege had her own reasons and agenda`s for getting involved in this case and never worked for them) went to police shortly after discovery of murders and told them she knew Max (even though she had not seen him in nearly 10 yrs prior to this) and got involved.
You can never judge a book by its cover as you cannot judge a case based upon sensational media headlines and testimonies based on hearsay.
Thursday, October 14, 2010
GOING TO TRIAL
The Sica family has known from the very beginning that this case would go to trial, it is no surprise to them at all. The state has spent $20 million so far on this case. The Sica family have stood and will stand by Max 100%. The family and people who truly know Max know who he is.
For those few who have made extremely vile comments, i just hope that one day it does not happen to you or a loved one to be in a similar position and to know exactly what it feels like.
For those who leave a comment and claim to know the family personally, please do speak with the family im sure they would be quite interested in all aspects of what it is you have to tell them.
Thank you to all the people who support Max and to others that dont know him or know much about this case but at least have the decency to comment appropriately, without being Judge, Jury and executioner, for this is only (in my opinion) a sign of ignorance.
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
BRISBANE TIMES ARTICLE IN PAPER TODAY 5/10/10
Sica witness denies lying
Amelia Bentley
October 5, 2010 - 5:00AM
A friend of slain teenager Kunal Singh has denied creating a story to help implicate Max Sica in the Singh siblings' murders, in order to remove suspicion he was the killer.
In Brisbane Magistrates Court yesterday, Anil Jaga refused to answer several questions thrown at him by Mr Sica's defence barrister Sam Di Carlo, who accused him of lying to detectives.
Mr Sica, 40, is accused of the grisly murders of Neelma, Kunal and Sidhi Singh, whose bodies were found in a spa in their home at Bridgeman Downs, in Brisbane's north, in April 2003.
Police allege he killed her, along with her brother and sister, following an argument at their home, while their parents were in Fiji on business.
Today, a tape was played in court showing Mr Jaga agreeing to become a police informant to feed detectives information on Mr Sica in August 2005.
At that time, Mr Sica was under investigation for the murders. He was not arrested and charged until late 2008.
Mr Di Carlo asked Mr Jaga if he made up information he gave to the police.
"Did you tell these lies in order to inculpate Max Sica as to exculpate yourself for murdering Kunal, Neelma and Sidhi?" he asked.
"No," replied Mr Jaga.
"Did you do it to get your 15 minutes of fame?" he asked.
"No," replied Mr Jaga.
Mr Jaga, who the court heard had known Kunal since primary school, refused to answer whether police officers told him they were determined to "get Max Sica" because they had made up their mind he was the killer.
Mr Jaga is not first witness in the case Mr Di Carlo has suggested were involved in the deaths.
He asked the siblings' father Vijay Singh if he had organised the murders and had "set up" Mr Sica.
"No way," Mr Singh said.
The committal hearing continues.
This is what was printed in paper regarding yesterday`s witness court appearance.
The heading of the article WITNESS DENIES LYING is a joke in itself. All Mr Jaga ever did was lie through his teeth. There are many video tapes of police interviews with Mr Jaga where it tells the story as it is .....
Another thing this article did not mention (i guess because the reporters were there for only a relatively short time)is that Mr Jaga was never charged for commiting purjury and obstructing the course of justice.
READ POST BELOW THIS ONE .........................
Amelia Bentley
October 5, 2010 - 5:00AM
A friend of slain teenager Kunal Singh has denied creating a story to help implicate Max Sica in the Singh siblings' murders, in order to remove suspicion he was the killer.
In Brisbane Magistrates Court yesterday, Anil Jaga refused to answer several questions thrown at him by Mr Sica's defence barrister Sam Di Carlo, who accused him of lying to detectives.
Mr Sica, 40, is accused of the grisly murders of Neelma, Kunal and Sidhi Singh, whose bodies were found in a spa in their home at Bridgeman Downs, in Brisbane's north, in April 2003.
Police allege he killed her, along with her brother and sister, following an argument at their home, while their parents were in Fiji on business.
Today, a tape was played in court showing Mr Jaga agreeing to become a police informant to feed detectives information on Mr Sica in August 2005.
At that time, Mr Sica was under investigation for the murders. He was not arrested and charged until late 2008.
Mr Di Carlo asked Mr Jaga if he made up information he gave to the police.
"Did you tell these lies in order to inculpate Max Sica as to exculpate yourself for murdering Kunal, Neelma and Sidhi?" he asked.
"No," replied Mr Jaga.
"Did you do it to get your 15 minutes of fame?" he asked.
"No," replied Mr Jaga.
Mr Jaga, who the court heard had known Kunal since primary school, refused to answer whether police officers told him they were determined to "get Max Sica" because they had made up their mind he was the killer.
Mr Jaga is not first witness in the case Mr Di Carlo has suggested were involved in the deaths.
He asked the siblings' father Vijay Singh if he had organised the murders and had "set up" Mr Sica.
"No way," Mr Singh said.
The committal hearing continues.
This is what was printed in paper regarding yesterday`s witness court appearance.
The heading of the article WITNESS DENIES LYING is a joke in itself. All Mr Jaga ever did was lie through his teeth. There are many video tapes of police interviews with Mr Jaga where it tells the story as it is .....
Another thing this article did not mention (i guess because the reporters were there for only a relatively short time)is that Mr Jaga was never charged for commiting purjury and obstructing the course of justice.
READ POST BELOW THIS ONE .........................
Monday, October 4, 2010
WITNESS FABRICATES EVIDENCE ABOUT SICA CARRYING FRIENDS DEAD BODY
Today (Monday 4th October) a witness by the name of Anil Jaga was called in by defence. This witness was informed by the judge that since he could incriminate himself, he didnt have to answer the questions put to him, so if he chose to, he could respond with "I do not wish to answer".
Mr Jaga had gone to police in 2005 and stated that he was at the scene of the crime on Sunday 20th April 2003. He said he had parked his car in a nearby street and not in front of the house. He said that he went there to see his friend Kunal Singh and that when he got there he looked through the glass panel of the front door and saw Mr Sica carrying Kunal Singh`s body over his shoulder on the stairway. He also tells police that he then went through the back entrance to see what was going on and that he had a video camera with him. He then told them that he was taping and that he thought Mr Sica had seen him so he ran out of the house down the street and hid the tape in a drain (just in case Mr Sica caught up with him). He says that when he went to retrieve this tape (one week later) it had rained so the tape was ruined.
Tapes were shown in court today of Mr Jaga at the police station. On these tapes you see Mr Jaga making the above statements to police. Police at one point ask Mr Jaga to sign a document making him a police informant. Mr Jaga continues to say that what he saw is true, he also says a lot of other things about Mr Sica, this goes on for about three and a half months.
He and Katrina (Kunal Singh`s then girlfriend) were romantically involved some time after Kunal Singh`s death. He had also told her what he had told police like he also told his mother and a few other people. There were apparently different versions by him said to these people than the version he had told police. Police had said to Mr Jaga before this (and on more than one occasion) that if he was making it up, he still had a chance to come clean and that if he didnt and they found out he had been lying, he could be prosecuted. Mr Jaga was also asked by police to take a polygraph test at about that time. (to which when asked in court today if he had taken that polygraph test his answer was, "i do not recall") Police start to question the validity of Mr Jaga`s claims so they confront him. His mother is seen on tape at a police station waiting for her son to enter the room. Her son, a female and male officer enter the room and start to question him. They tell him that things dont add up and that if he is lying he should tell the truth. They continue on and say to him do it for your mother, tell the truth, you say you love your mother so much, then they say, do it for Sidhi (the youngest Singh sibbling) she was a child, she didnt deserve this, then they say do it for Katrina, (i did not hear anyone say, do it because what you did is just wrong) Why did they want to make him confess in the presence of his mother?
Mr Jaga then says, yes, its true, its all a lie ALL HE SAID ABOUT MR SICA WAS A LIE. Police respond by saying he did an honorable thing, that it was commendable what he tried to do etc etc. The Male officer says to Mr Jaga that some damage had been done and that there would need to be some sort of damage control. The female officer asks Mr Jaga if Mr Sica was aware of what he had been saying, Mr Jaga responds, no, i told you, it was all a lie. The female officer says, we need to know if Mr Sica has knowledge of you saying this, if he does, we need to put you under police protection.
There is so much more that was said by Mr Jaga and it will be made available at some stage.
In court today Mr Jaga was asked many questions to which he responded, "i do not wish to answer", "i do not recall" and a no here and there. When he was asked why he would fabricate such a story his answer was "i do not wish to answer". He was asked if the Singh`s would have asked him to fabricate the story as to inculpate Mr Sica, he answered "no", he was asked if he fabricated the story to inculpate Mr Sica as to disculpate himself from committing the crimes and had killed Kunal, Sidhi and Neelma, he answers "i do not wish to answer".
Mr Jaga is asked if he was ever charged for lying and for obstruction of justice, he answers "i do not wish to answer" He is then told by the judge that he can answer that question and should, Mr Jaga then responds, NO.
So Mr Jaga is practically given a pat on the back and honored for waisting police time, fabricating evidence and more, he also had his rights on the stand not to answer questions so not to incriminate himself, and then WAS NEVER CHARGED WITH PERJURY. On a tape you see an officer tell Mr Jaga, we dont want Max Sica to walk (incase Mr Jaga was making up the story then in 2005) but Mr Jaga got to walk, talk commit an offence and not get charged.
Today in court there were a couple of female reporters, (courier mail and Brisbane times i think) they stayed for a short while and then left.
Tomorrow Ms Bowman will be further cross examined and then Mr Jaga will be back on the stand.
Like i have already stated, unless you are in the same position of having the whole weight of the law on top of you and unless you know all the facts, you just dont have the whole picture.
Saturday, October 2, 2010
Lead Detective Leaks Evidence Of CMC Documents To Witness - WHERE WAS THE MEDIA?
Detective Senior Sergeant Joeseph Zitny prepared a 9 page document, which contained a "summary" of Ms Andrea Bowmans testimony during the CMC inquiry in 2006 and emailed it to her for the preparation of her statement, a court has been told.
Ms Bowman was asked repeatedly about the process she had adopted to prepare her statement, and said that she had used media articles, emails, text messages, notes, etc, but did not recollect the 9 page CMC document.Mr Di Carlo produced and email from Mr Zitny to Ms Bowman dated the 11th of march 2009, to which was attached a 9 page summary of what Ms Bowman had told the court at the CMC hearings in 2006. Ms Bowman said that she could not recall Mr Zitny saying he'd provide a summary from the CMC transcripts for her statement, but agreed it was provided to her.
When asked about the conversation on the 22/04/08 which was recorded, Ms Bowman said that she had no recollection of Mr Sica saying to her, " (i wont give you what you want, why on earth out of all people would i tell you anything?)" but recalled Max had said this before, during the early days. Ms Bowman also had no recollection of Max saying to her, "IF I SAID THAT, (refering to the remorse statement that the media sensationalised) IT WOULD HAVE BEEN FOR ONE THING, AND ONE THING ONLY......." we will fill in the gaps later to avoid leading Ms Bowman as she is currently under cross examination. Or when he said "it appears you are trying to get me" or when Max asked her who the cops would use after her.
Mr Di Carlo asked why she couldn't recall much under cross examination and yet, was able to provide a chronological sequence of events, emails and phone conversations during evidence in chief and Ms Bowman agreed that she would look at her statement.
For five and a half years prior to his arrest on 30/12/08, and uptil today, Mr Sica has been through "trial by media." They were present for every raid, every police interview, every forensic procedure order carried out on Max. They even made headlines about him being booked for driving his brothers unregistered vehicle, despite max being unaware.
Ms Andrea Bowman has alledged that Max had made "partial confessions"' to her. Where is the media I wonder, as the polices' "star" witness is being cross examined, and evidence of official police misconduct is coming out. For the majority of this commital proceedings, the media has stayed away especially during cross examination of witnesses.Let's see if they will be present for another person who claimed to have witnessed Max killing the Singh children on 20/4/03 and later admitted that it was a lie.
The opportunity for the reporters to give Max at least a "fair" trial by media is here, (so if and when Max gets cleared of these or other charges, the public can know the facts) but whether they grasp that, is entirely up to them.Guess in the meantime, we just have to wait and see.........................
Thursday, September 30, 2010
COMMITTAL WEDNESDAY 29TH SEPT
Today the papers did not bother to print a thing. Today Ms Bowman was thoroughly cross examined.
I once read a comment which said.............
The media leave out relevant facts in articles which clarifies the situation. They only use selected bits of information to sensationalise the story just to sell newspapers. Like the saying goes, "You don't let the facts get in the way of a good story".
Tomorrow Ms Bowman will be again cross examined, i wonder IF and WHAT the papers will print.
Links to cases where people have been wrongfully accused and most did many years jail. Most people believe a person is guilty because they are charged for that crime, because of what they read in papers, because the law says it has its evidence etc etc. Below are links related to some stories about how anyone can end up in jail and persecuted and then found to be innocent. Some cases it was astounding as to how a person was ever charged in the first place.
Of course im not saying that all people are innocent of what they are accused of, but some think that just because you are charged, you must be guilty.
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
COMMITTAL TUESDAY 28TH SEPT
Andrea Bowman said the incident occurred about 20 years ago when the pair were teenagers.
Sica, 40, is facing a committal hearing in the Brisbane Magistrates Court, charged with the murders of his girlfriend Neelma Singh, 24, and her siblings Kunal, 18, and Sidhi, 12.
As teenagers, Bowman said she and Sica would go driving to places including Mt Coot-tha where they'd sit in their cars and talk for hours.
"We were good friends. I felt like a sister to him," she said.
But she said Sica had more romantic feelings towards her, and bought her an expensive toy bear. She told him they had no future as a couple, and claimed his mother later said the rejection had a bigger effect on him than she thought.
Bowman also recalled that Sica followed her home with his car lights off when they were teens. "He frightened me," she said. "I don't know what it was about. It was odd."
She said Sica got out of his car and she screamed at him not to come near her.
"Someone opened their door, some lights came on and he got back in his car."
Bowman said she later spoke to Sica about it, and he said he was just following her to see what she was up to after work.
Under cross-examination by defence counsel Sam Di Carlo, Bowman spoke of the two sides of Sica that she called Massimo and Max. "When we were young, he'd get glassy-eyed, and I thought 'there's something not right'," she said.
Bowman described Max as funny and bright with a softer nature. "He's someone you can be very fond of. That's the side that tends to get down and reflective." The other side seemed to "have more presence". "He can be more threatening. It's just completely contrasting behaviour to the softer, placid side."
The hearing continues.
----------------------------------------------------
Ms Bowman although thinking all this still continued seeing Max, went for drives with him and then was the one to make initial contact with Max many years later when she found out about the Singh murders. She says Max had more romantic feelings towards her and that she just wanted a friendship etc etc, she said he would get glassy eyed and that she thought "there`s something not right"............
Ms Bowman even though feeling what she did about him (when they were teenagers), still made contact with him more than ten years later of her own accord.
Seems strange to me that you would want to see someone so many years later if you truly believe what Ms Bowman has said.
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
Just A COMMENT
P.S. Ms Bowman also agreed that what is in her statement is inconsistent to her testimony in court. (about max blowing up roma st police station) In her statement she said it was an immature and silly comment from someone who is hurt and angry but still a silly comment, and in court it appeared cold and calculated, that ie max was anxious, nervous and serious. Her reason for the inconsistency - Her "view" on how she viewed things has changed and matured since. She is now 41 years of age.
YOU DO THE MATHS
A WITNESS giving evidence in the case of three murdered siblings has admitted to using newspaper reports to help write her police statement.
Neelma Singh, 24, and her siblings Kunal, 18, and Sidhi, 12, were found dead in the spa at their family's Bridgeman Downs home on Brisbane's northside on April 22, 2003.
Max Sica, who was Neelma's boyfriend in the months before her death, is facing three charges of murder and has been in custody since December 2008.
At a committal hearing in the Brisbane Magistrates Court on Monday, Sica's friend Andrea Louise Bowman said she used newspaper reports to help "time mark'' conversations she had with Sica over seven years.
During cross examination, defence lawyer Sam Di Carlo put to Ms Bowman that without researching newspaper articles she had limited recollections.
"I remember saying to (Sica) 'Have you seen this in the paper?''' Ms Bowman said.
"That's how I initiated contact with him.''
Ms Bowman said she started putting together her statement at a police station but found she was able to remember conversations and events better by doing it in her own time at home and using newspaper reports as prompts.
"The articles were time markers,'' she said.
Mr Di Carlo challenged Ms Bowman on whether it was possible she could confuse the newspaper stories with actual recollections.
"In ordinary human beings our subconscious, when we read something our minds (store it) as memory and we can get part of that story confused with actual recollections,'' Mr Di Carlo said.
"I don't know whether that happens or doesn't happen,'' Ms Bowman said.
Mr Di Carlo asked Ms Bowman if she hears voices.
"Did you hear voices saying 'Shut up, shut up?'''
She replied she heard a "voice of reason'' telling her not to do something in some situations, but not "crazy voices''.
Ms Bowman denied she was writing a book on the Singh murder case.
"I don't have a proposed book, I have had seven years of this, I don't want a day more,'' she told the court.
The court was told Ms Bowman suffers from a neurological condition which in the past had caused her to suffer "seniors moments'' and affected her memory.
The committal hearing continues
YOU DO THE MATHS........
Ms Bowman said in court today, "i have had seven yrs of this, i dont want a day more!"
Ms Bowman was 19 at the time she worked for the Sica family for about a year in 1989. She made allegations against Max`s brother in law and then went to work for Max`s father, whom she later also accused of making a pass at her.
After ten years of no contact, Ms Bowman decided to get in touch with Max as soon as she came to know of the triple murders. The first time she met Max (after the murders) was on the 29th May 2003, she then had a few phone calls and meetings before a significant (4 hr conversation) with Max on 16/07/03. The next day (17/07/03) police went to speak to Ms Bowman about an unrelated matter. Ms Bowman asked the officer about the Singh case and told him that she was a friend of Max`s. She mentioned Max to this officer at least twice, despite the "matter" being unrelated.
Over the years, she spoke to the police 70 times, and was shocked to hear the figure herself. (41 of these conversations are recorded)
The police asked Ms Bowman (and other people close to max) if they would tape record conversations with Max. Detective Zitny gave her a recorder in 2003, which she only used ONCE. Despite telling Det Zitny in 2007 that Max had, and or started making "partial admissions",to her, Ms Bowman continued not to record any of the conversations. Even the "notes" that she made only contained the scenario of which they spoke about, not the conversation itself. On the 22/04/08, five yrs after Max discovered the bodies, Ms Bowman had a conversation with Max where she WAS wearing a police wire.
Ms Bowman herself admitted that she would initiate all contact and conversation, that she would present scenario`s to Max and then they discussed the hypothesis about what the killers may have done. She also acknowledged the fact that she would do most of the talking.
Ms Bowman was in contact with the lead Detective (mr zitny)from 2003.
We all know the different technique police use to carry out investigations, but even a child can tell you that the best method would be to use a suspects friend, or someone close. Ms Bowman herself stated that Max would often ask if she was wired, pat her for bugs, ask if he was busted, (through her), to tell her "detective friends" that he didnt give her any information. She also stated that Max too would record the conversation.
Ms Bowman thought that her conversations with Max was a secret, and only between the two of them. Little does she know that their conversations was a hot topic in the Sica family and friends as Max would avoid her at times and always told everyone that she worked for the police, presenting their scenario`s and then directing questions towards Max as if she was speaking to the real killer.
Initially, she would just ask Max lots of questions about the crime scene and what he saw, she then slowly transitioned the conversations in an attempt to get a "partial admission" through her presentation of different scenario`s and hypothesis and talking to Max as if he was the killer.
Ms Bowman got herself involved in this case out of her own accord, despite having a husband and family. According to the police, Ms Bowman had her "own" reasons and "agendas" for involvement and never worked for them. In 2008, the night prior to either the raid or arrest in relation to the sex charges (will confirm which) Ms Bowman happens to call Max again and tries to organize a meeting for the next day. She then attempted to call Max a number of times when he was out of bail for 6 weeks, even using a different number when she noticed Max not answering.
On the 30th Dec 2008, Max was arrested for the Singh murders,5 and a half yrs after their deaths. Ms Bowman, despite knowing that Max was arrested, called the Sica residence and went over to talk to Max`s wife and mother about the sex charges. (Jan/Feb 2009) She also sent a letter to Max after this event in prison. Funny part is Detective Zitny was working for the child protection and investigation unit at Pine Rivers in 2008, but i guess that too is a coincidence.
I dont know about you, but to me this does not sound like a person who "doesnt want a day more" of this. Everyone knows that if a situation is causing you stress (and moreso none of your business) you avoid the situation altogether. It does not take a genius, but a LOGICAL person to figure out what to do if they do not want to be part of an investigation, especially one as large and complex as the Singh murders. Even his wife lost most of her friends and relatives, because they do not want their names associated with this matter. You dont really need the boring details to add the sum, just do the maths yourself.
Neelma Singh, 24, and her siblings Kunal, 18, and Sidhi, 12, were found dead in the spa at their family's Bridgeman Downs home on Brisbane's northside on April 22, 2003.
Max Sica, who was Neelma's boyfriend in the months before her death, is facing three charges of murder and has been in custody since December 2008.
At a committal hearing in the Brisbane Magistrates Court on Monday, Sica's friend Andrea Louise Bowman said she used newspaper reports to help "time mark'' conversations she had with Sica over seven years.
During cross examination, defence lawyer Sam Di Carlo put to Ms Bowman that without researching newspaper articles she had limited recollections.
"I remember saying to (Sica) 'Have you seen this in the paper?''' Ms Bowman said.
"That's how I initiated contact with him.''
Ms Bowman said she started putting together her statement at a police station but found she was able to remember conversations and events better by doing it in her own time at home and using newspaper reports as prompts.
"The articles were time markers,'' she said.
Mr Di Carlo challenged Ms Bowman on whether it was possible she could confuse the newspaper stories with actual recollections.
"In ordinary human beings our subconscious, when we read something our minds (store it) as memory and we can get part of that story confused with actual recollections,'' Mr Di Carlo said.
"I don't know whether that happens or doesn't happen,'' Ms Bowman said.
Mr Di Carlo asked Ms Bowman if she hears voices.
"Did you hear voices saying 'Shut up, shut up?'''
She replied she heard a "voice of reason'' telling her not to do something in some situations, but not "crazy voices''.
Ms Bowman denied she was writing a book on the Singh murder case.
"I don't have a proposed book, I have had seven years of this, I don't want a day more,'' she told the court.
The court was told Ms Bowman suffers from a neurological condition which in the past had caused her to suffer "seniors moments'' and affected her memory.
The committal hearing continues
YOU DO THE MATHS........
Ms Bowman said in court today, "i have had seven yrs of this, i dont want a day more!"
Ms Bowman was 19 at the time she worked for the Sica family for about a year in 1989. She made allegations against Max`s brother in law and then went to work for Max`s father, whom she later also accused of making a pass at her.
After ten years of no contact, Ms Bowman decided to get in touch with Max as soon as she came to know of the triple murders. The first time she met Max (after the murders) was on the 29th May 2003, she then had a few phone calls and meetings before a significant (4 hr conversation) with Max on 16/07/03. The next day (17/07/03) police went to speak to Ms Bowman about an unrelated matter. Ms Bowman asked the officer about the Singh case and told him that she was a friend of Max`s. She mentioned Max to this officer at least twice, despite the "matter" being unrelated.
Over the years, she spoke to the police 70 times, and was shocked to hear the figure herself. (41 of these conversations are recorded)
The police asked Ms Bowman (and other people close to max) if they would tape record conversations with Max. Detective Zitny gave her a recorder in 2003, which she only used ONCE. Despite telling Det Zitny in 2007 that Max had, and or started making "partial admissions",to her, Ms Bowman continued not to record any of the conversations. Even the "notes" that she made only contained the scenario of which they spoke about, not the conversation itself. On the 22/04/08, five yrs after Max discovered the bodies, Ms Bowman had a conversation with Max where she WAS wearing a police wire.
Ms Bowman herself admitted that she would initiate all contact and conversation, that she would present scenario`s to Max and then they discussed the hypothesis about what the killers may have done. She also acknowledged the fact that she would do most of the talking.
Ms Bowman was in contact with the lead Detective (mr zitny)from 2003.
We all know the different technique police use to carry out investigations, but even a child can tell you that the best method would be to use a suspects friend, or someone close. Ms Bowman herself stated that Max would often ask if she was wired, pat her for bugs, ask if he was busted, (through her), to tell her "detective friends" that he didnt give her any information. She also stated that Max too would record the conversation.
Ms Bowman thought that her conversations with Max was a secret, and only between the two of them. Little does she know that their conversations was a hot topic in the Sica family and friends as Max would avoid her at times and always told everyone that she worked for the police, presenting their scenario`s and then directing questions towards Max as if she was speaking to the real killer.
Initially, she would just ask Max lots of questions about the crime scene and what he saw, she then slowly transitioned the conversations in an attempt to get a "partial admission" through her presentation of different scenario`s and hypothesis and talking to Max as if he was the killer.
Ms Bowman got herself involved in this case out of her own accord, despite having a husband and family. According to the police, Ms Bowman had her "own" reasons and "agendas" for involvement and never worked for them. In 2008, the night prior to either the raid or arrest in relation to the sex charges (will confirm which) Ms Bowman happens to call Max again and tries to organize a meeting for the next day. She then attempted to call Max a number of times when he was out of bail for 6 weeks, even using a different number when she noticed Max not answering.
On the 30th Dec 2008, Max was arrested for the Singh murders,5 and a half yrs after their deaths. Ms Bowman, despite knowing that Max was arrested, called the Sica residence and went over to talk to Max`s wife and mother about the sex charges. (Jan/Feb 2009) She also sent a letter to Max after this event in prison. Funny part is Detective Zitny was working for the child protection and investigation unit at Pine Rivers in 2008, but i guess that too is a coincidence.
I dont know about you, but to me this does not sound like a person who "doesnt want a day more" of this. Everyone knows that if a situation is causing you stress (and moreso none of your business) you avoid the situation altogether. It does not take a genius, but a LOGICAL person to figure out what to do if they do not want to be part of an investigation, especially one as large and complex as the Singh murders. Even his wife lost most of her friends and relatives, because they do not want their names associated with this matter. You dont really need the boring details to add the sum, just do the maths yourself.
Monday, September 27, 2010
COMMITTAL MONDAY 27TH SEPT
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/accused-murderer-had-eyes-like-a-pit-bull-20100927-15th4.html
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/witness-in-max-sica-trial-used-newspaper-reports-to-write-statement/story-e6frg6nf-1225930069862?from=public_rss
http://www.news.com.au/max-sica-accused-of-murdering-singh-siblings-allegedly-told-friend-of-victims-pleas/story-e6freoof-1225930218980?from=public_rss
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/witness-in-max-sica-trial-used-newspaper-reports-to-write-statement/story-e6frg6nf-1225930069862?from=public_rss
http://www.news.com.au/max-sica-accused-of-murdering-singh-siblings-allegedly-told-friend-of-victims-pleas/story-e6freoof-1225930218980?from=public_rss
The police know from day one and so does anybody that has been to the committal and heard the crime scene evidence that Sidhi was killed while she was sleeping. (all evidence points to this. example blood spatter) It was also mentioned during the early years many times in the media.
Friday, September 24, 2010
COMMITTAL FRIDAY 24TH SEPT
Court told Max Sica `confided in writer'
Lisa Martin From: AAP September 24, 2010 4:49PM
A MAN accused of slaying three siblings told a woman writing a book about him that she would become famous if she got his confession, a court has heard.
Neelma Singh, 24, and her siblings Kunal, 18, and Sidhi, 12, were found dead in the spa at their family's Brisbane home on April 22, 2003.
Max Sica, who was Neelma's boyfriend in the months before her death, is facing three charges of murder.
A committal hearing in Brisbane Magistrates Court on Friday heard Sica had been approached to write a book, but he thought his friend Andrea Louise Bowman could do a better job.
Ms Bowman kept diary notes about conversations she had with Sica in 2007.
She said Sica would sometimes become "paranoid", ask her if she was a police officer and wonder aloud if she was scared in his company.
"He asked if I had video surveillance in my sunglasses," she told the committal hearing.
"(During another conversation) he told me 'If you got my confession you would be famous . . . and get paid'."
The court heard Ms Bowman told Sica she had a dream about the killings.
"There were gurgling sounds . . . I just wanted the sound to stop," she said.
"(Sica) said: 'Maybe that's why I ran the spa."'
She said Sica told her Neelma had a bad temper and slept with a machete under her bed.
Ms Bowman told the court she recalled asking Sica whether he killed the children to get back at their mother Shirley Singh, who the court had earlier in the week heard was having an affair with a younger man.
"He said: 'Yes, I blame her, she should never have taken him back'," she said.
Ms Bowman said she had asked Sica if he panicked after killing the Singh siblings.
"He said: 'Of course you panic, you just killed those bitches, you have to get out of there'," she said.
She told the court she remembered telling Sica about a comment his mother had made: "What kind of monster kills them and puts them in a bath to make them into soup?"
"He asked: 'Did she say that?' I said: 'Yes, she said that to me on the phone'... (and) he hung his head," she said.
Defence counsel Sam Di Carlo told the court Ms Bowman had worked with police for four years under the guise of writing a book and her witness statement resembled a Mills and Boon fiction novel.
The committal hearing continues.
Lisa Martin From: AAP September 24, 2010 4:49PM
A MAN accused of slaying three siblings told a woman writing a book about him that she would become famous if she got his confession, a court has heard.
Neelma Singh, 24, and her siblings Kunal, 18, and Sidhi, 12, were found dead in the spa at their family's Brisbane home on April 22, 2003.
Max Sica, who was Neelma's boyfriend in the months before her death, is facing three charges of murder.
A committal hearing in Brisbane Magistrates Court on Friday heard Sica had been approached to write a book, but he thought his friend Andrea Louise Bowman could do a better job.
Ms Bowman kept diary notes about conversations she had with Sica in 2007.
She said Sica would sometimes become "paranoid", ask her if she was a police officer and wonder aloud if she was scared in his company.
"He asked if I had video surveillance in my sunglasses," she told the committal hearing.
"(During another conversation) he told me 'If you got my confession you would be famous . . . and get paid'."
The court heard Ms Bowman told Sica she had a dream about the killings.
"There were gurgling sounds . . . I just wanted the sound to stop," she said.
"(Sica) said: 'Maybe that's why I ran the spa."'
She said Sica told her Neelma had a bad temper and slept with a machete under her bed.
Ms Bowman told the court she recalled asking Sica whether he killed the children to get back at their mother Shirley Singh, who the court had earlier in the week heard was having an affair with a younger man.
"He said: 'Yes, I blame her, she should never have taken him back'," she said.
Ms Bowman said she had asked Sica if he panicked after killing the Singh siblings.
"He said: 'Of course you panic, you just killed those bitches, you have to get out of there'," she said.
She told the court she remembered telling Sica about a comment his mother had made: "What kind of monster kills them and puts them in a bath to make them into soup?"
"He asked: 'Did she say that?' I said: 'Yes, she said that to me on the phone'... (and) he hung his head," she said.
Defence counsel Sam Di Carlo told the court Ms Bowman had worked with police for four years under the guise of writing a book and her witness statement resembled a Mills and Boon fiction novel.
The committal hearing continues.
COMMITTAL THURSDAY 23RD SEPT
Friend pens book about Singh murder accused Max Sica
Jasmin Lill From: The Courier-Mail September 23, 2010 11:51PM
THE man accused of slaying three siblings was the subject of a book being written by a friend, a court has been told.
Max Sica, 40, is in custody facing a committal hearing in the Brisbane Magistrates Court charged with killing his former girlfriend Neelma Singh, 24, her brother Kunal, 18, and sister Sidhi, 12. Their bodies were found in a spa at their Bridgeman Downs home, on Brisbane's northside, in April 2003.
Sica's friend Andrea Louise Bowman said Sica had been approached to write a book after the killings but he thought she would do it better.
Bowman said she produced four or five pages to show to Sica but she described it as a ''mock book''.
''I was very interested in finding out what was going on with Max. There were way too many inconsistencies,'' she said.
Bowman said Sica was pleased with what she had written, which included a piece on people who had been wrongly imprisoned and later found to be innocent.
She said Sica agreed to get a copy of his criminal record to include in the book, and also posed for pictures.
''I said if he got arrested and taken away, I wouldn't have access to him to take a photo,'' Bowman said.
She said that as she entered his house for a photo shoot in 2006, Sica had checked her camera for listening devices.
While speaking to Sica, she said he spoke of holding Neelma's hand after finding her in the spa. ''He said, `I held Neelma's hand to say goodbye.' He said it was normal, it was soft,'' Bowman said.
But she said Sica later described Neelma's hand as ''curled over and stiff''.
During another conversation in Sica's bedroom, Bowman said Sica got ''glassy-eyed'' and his expression changed. ''He said, 'Do you ever think you're lucky I didn't kill you?'.'' she recounted.
She said Sica came close to her with a nail file and said: ''I could kill you right now.''
''He looked gleeful, like this was arousing,'' she said. She told the court she was starting to see ''both sides'' of her friend's personality.
''There's the soft, supportive, protective side, then there's the other side that's more venomous,'' she said. ''Max will either adore or despise you. If he despised you, you were going to be in trouble.''
After the pair met up at the Everton Park Hotel in 2007, Bowman said Sica told her: ''If I ever find out you're talking to the detectives, I'll take you for a little drive.''
Defence counsel Sam Di Carlo said Bowman had worked with police for four years under the guise of writing the book, and that her witness statement resembled a Mills and Boon.
The hearing continues.
Jasmin Lill From: The Courier-Mail September 23, 2010 11:51PM
THE man accused of slaying three siblings was the subject of a book being written by a friend, a court has been told.
Max Sica, 40, is in custody facing a committal hearing in the Brisbane Magistrates Court charged with killing his former girlfriend Neelma Singh, 24, her brother Kunal, 18, and sister Sidhi, 12. Their bodies were found in a spa at their Bridgeman Downs home, on Brisbane's northside, in April 2003.
Sica's friend Andrea Louise Bowman said Sica had been approached to write a book after the killings but he thought she would do it better.
Bowman said she produced four or five pages to show to Sica but she described it as a ''mock book''.
''I was very interested in finding out what was going on with Max. There were way too many inconsistencies,'' she said.
Bowman said Sica was pleased with what she had written, which included a piece on people who had been wrongly imprisoned and later found to be innocent.
She said Sica agreed to get a copy of his criminal record to include in the book, and also posed for pictures.
''I said if he got arrested and taken away, I wouldn't have access to him to take a photo,'' Bowman said.
She said that as she entered his house for a photo shoot in 2006, Sica had checked her camera for listening devices.
While speaking to Sica, she said he spoke of holding Neelma's hand after finding her in the spa. ''He said, `I held Neelma's hand to say goodbye.' He said it was normal, it was soft,'' Bowman said.
But she said Sica later described Neelma's hand as ''curled over and stiff''.
During another conversation in Sica's bedroom, Bowman said Sica got ''glassy-eyed'' and his expression changed. ''He said, 'Do you ever think you're lucky I didn't kill you?'.'' she recounted.
She said Sica came close to her with a nail file and said: ''I could kill you right now.''
''He looked gleeful, like this was arousing,'' she said. She told the court she was starting to see ''both sides'' of her friend's personality.
''There's the soft, supportive, protective side, then there's the other side that's more venomous,'' she said. ''Max will either adore or despise you. If he despised you, you were going to be in trouble.''
After the pair met up at the Everton Park Hotel in 2007, Bowman said Sica told her: ''If I ever find out you're talking to the detectives, I'll take you for a little drive.''
Defence counsel Sam Di Carlo said Bowman had worked with police for four years under the guise of writing the book, and that her witness statement resembled a Mills and Boon.
The hearing continues.
Thursday, September 23, 2010
COMMITTAL WEDNESDAY 22ND SEPT
Singh murder accused Max Sica threatened kill spree and police HQ attack, court told
Jasmin Lill From: The Courier-Mail September 22, 2010 11:23PM
ALLEGED triple murderer Max Sica boasted he would blow up Queensland Police headquarters and go on a killing spree, slaying more people than the man responsible for the Port Arthur massacre, a court heard yesterday.
The Singh siblings Neelma, 24, Kunal, 18, and Sidhi, 12, were killed in their home at Bridgeman Downs on Brisbane's northside in April 2003.
Sica, 40, is in custody facing a committal hearing in the Brisbane Magistrate's Court.
His friend Andrea Louise Bowman told the court Sica had spoken to her in the aftermath of the deaths.
"He said, 'I'm going to be done for the murders and when I do, I'm going to blow up the Roma St police headquarters','' she said.
Bowman claimed Sica said he would go on a killing spree, killing more people than the man responsible for the Port Arthur massacre, Martin Bryant, but wouldn't be dumb enough to get caught for it.
"He gets a lot of fan mail in prison,'' Sica allegedly said of Bryant.
Bowman said she also spoke to Sica about a news story where the Singh family had produced a letter from Kunal "beyond the grave" where he "wrote" to his murderer.
"Max scoffed and said, 'why didn't I get one then?''' Bowman said.
She and Sica hypothesised about how the murders had occurred, and Sica said he was on to "the real killer".
"He said, 'I'm going to find them, I'm doing my own investigation'."
The court heard Sica also told Bowman how he'd discovered the three siblings dead in the spa.
Sica told her he'd gone to the house to take them to the movies but when no-one answered, he went inside.
Bowman said Sica told her how he turned off the running tap of the spa, and used a stick to lift blankets off it before a hand popped out.
"I knew it was Sidhi's because it was small,'' Sica allegedly told Bowman.
She said Sica also told her about finding girlfriend Neelma, who appeared to have a gunshot wound in her chest.
Bowman said Sica had told her the siblings' father Vijay was a violent man, and that Neelma was planning to leave as soon as she came into some money.
She claimed Sica said "anyway, they're better off dead".
Bowman also said Sica told her he'd done "all my crying" in the first three days after the siblings were discovered.
The hearing continues.
_______________________________________________________________
Ms Bowman also ALLEGES in court that, Max told her he had a HIT LIST and that she (Bowman) was on THE TOP of this list. BUT it appears she continued seeing him many, many times after.
Jasmin Lill From: The Courier-Mail September 22, 2010 11:23PM
ALLEGED triple murderer Max Sica boasted he would blow up Queensland Police headquarters and go on a killing spree, slaying more people than the man responsible for the Port Arthur massacre, a court heard yesterday.
The Singh siblings Neelma, 24, Kunal, 18, and Sidhi, 12, were killed in their home at Bridgeman Downs on Brisbane's northside in April 2003.
Sica, 40, is in custody facing a committal hearing in the Brisbane Magistrate's Court.
His friend Andrea Louise Bowman told the court Sica had spoken to her in the aftermath of the deaths.
"He said, 'I'm going to be done for the murders and when I do, I'm going to blow up the Roma St police headquarters','' she said.
Bowman claimed Sica said he would go on a killing spree, killing more people than the man responsible for the Port Arthur massacre, Martin Bryant, but wouldn't be dumb enough to get caught for it.
"He gets a lot of fan mail in prison,'' Sica allegedly said of Bryant.
Bowman said she also spoke to Sica about a news story where the Singh family had produced a letter from Kunal "beyond the grave" where he "wrote" to his murderer.
"Max scoffed and said, 'why didn't I get one then?''' Bowman said.
She and Sica hypothesised about how the murders had occurred, and Sica said he was on to "the real killer".
"He said, 'I'm going to find them, I'm doing my own investigation'."
The court heard Sica also told Bowman how he'd discovered the three siblings dead in the spa.
Sica told her he'd gone to the house to take them to the movies but when no-one answered, he went inside.
Bowman said Sica told her how he turned off the running tap of the spa, and used a stick to lift blankets off it before a hand popped out.
"I knew it was Sidhi's because it was small,'' Sica allegedly told Bowman.
She said Sica also told her about finding girlfriend Neelma, who appeared to have a gunshot wound in her chest.
Bowman said Sica had told her the siblings' father Vijay was a violent man, and that Neelma was planning to leave as soon as she came into some money.
She claimed Sica said "anyway, they're better off dead".
Bowman also said Sica told her he'd done "all my crying" in the first three days after the siblings were discovered.
The hearing continues.
_______________________________________________________________
Ms Bowman also ALLEGES in court that, Max told her he had a HIT LIST and that she (Bowman) was on THE TOP of this list. BUT it appears she continued seeing him many, many times after.
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
COMMITTAL TUESDAY 21 SEPTEMBER
Singh murders: cop quizzed over text message
September 22, 2010 - 12:00AM
A police officer allegedly forwarded a text message from the mobile phone of a dead woman to his private phone without logging it in police investigation records, a Brisbane court has heard.
Neelma Singh, 24, and her siblings Kunal, 18, and Sidhi, 12, were found dead in the spa at their family's Bridgeman Downs home on Brisbane's northside on April 22, 2003.
Max Sica, who was Neelma's boyfriend in the months before her death, is facing three charges of murder over the deaths and has been in custody since December 2008.
His committal hearing resumed in the Brisbane Magistrates Court yesterday.
The court was told Neelma sent an angry SMS message to a man by the name of Mr Lala saying: "I heard you met Max this week, before you accuse me, get your story straight. You have no right to say what you did".
This afternoon, Sica's defence lawyer Sam Di Carlo asked investigator Detective Senior Sergeant Andrew Massingham why, according to phone records, a police officer involved in the investigation, Detective Senior Constable Philip Heery, had sent the message to his own personal phone in November 2003.
"He was not a forensic officer," Mr Di Carlo said.
Det Sen Sgt Massingham said he did not consider it unusual and was not aware of any reasons for this action.
Mr Di Carlo said the action had not been noted in formal police records.
The court heard that on other occasions, Det Sen Const Heery and other officers had followed "proper procedure" and videotaped and tape-recorded their dealings with the mobile phone in question.
Earlier today, Neelma's Fijian former boyfriend, Jasveer Singh, 27, an accountant who worked for her father's automotive business in Fiji, gave evidence.
The court heard Mr Singh and Neelma had had a sexual relationship and had discussed getting married.
Mr Singh said he had phoned his girlfriend in December 2002 to wish her a happy birthday and, after a short conversation, she said she would phone him back because she was busy.
The court heard that Mr Singh called her five more times that day, but the phone connections dropped out or she didn't answer.
Mr Singh said he received a "polite" phone call, "not aggressive in nature", from Sica telling him that Neelma didn't want to talk to him and revealing his own relationship with Neelma.
"How did this make you feel?" Mr Di Carlo asked.
Mr Singh said: "If she was happy with Max, it was better for me to back out."
Mr Singh and other employees were with Neelma's parents, Shirley and Vijay Singh, in Fiji at about eight (local time) on the night they heard that three bodies had been found at their Brisbane home.
Jasveer Singh told the court he received a phone call about shots fired in Brisbane, but did not have specific recollections of it.
Asked if he had any Fijian friends who had been to Australia or if police had asked him about Neelma cheating on him, or whether officers had ever said they were investigating him as a suspect, he said: "No".
Mr Di Carlo told the court he was not suggesting Jasveer Singh was a suspect, but wanted to know if police had explored this possibility.
The court also heard a recording of a threatening message left on the telephone answering machine of Shirley and Vijay Singh's Brisbane home.
The speaker, a native Fijian, said: "I know where your family lives, Vijay, you f... with my family, I will f... with yours ... I'm going to rape your wife and daughters."
The committal hearing continues tomorrow.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Neelma Singh's ex-boyfriend tells how he 'backed out' of relationship
From: AAP September 21, 2010 4:36PM
THE Fijian former boyfriend of a murdered Brisbane woman has told a court he thought it better to "back out" of their relationship if she'd found happiness with another man.
Neelma Singh, 24, and her siblings Kunal, 18, and Sidhi, 12, were found dead in the spa at their family's Bridgeman Downs home on Brisbane's northside on April 22, 2003.
Max Sica, who was Neelma's boyfriend in the months before her death, is facing three charges of murder over the deaths and has been in custody since December 2008.
His committal hearing resumed in the Brisbane Magistrates Court on Monday after a 10-week adjournment.
Neelma's Fijian former boyfriend, Jasveer Singh, 27, an accountant who worked for her father's automotive business in Fiji, has travelled from his homeland to give evidence at the hearing.
The trip is his first visit to Australia.
The court heard Mr Singh and Neelma had had a sexual relationship and had discussed getting married.
Sica's defence counsel, Sam Di Carlo, asked Mr Singh what he knew about a man called Max.
Mr Singh told the court Neelma had said he was just a friend who was good with computers and had a sports car.
"She never spoke ill of him," he told the court.
Mr Di Carlo asked Mr Singh about phone calls between him and Neelma on December 29, 2002, and a call from Sica.
Mr Singh said he had phoned his girlfriend to wish her a happy birthday and, after a short conversation, she said she would phone him back because she was busy.
"She was happy I called," he said.
The court heard that Mr Singh called her five more times that day, but the phone connections dropped out or she didn't answer.
Mr Singh said he received a "polite" phone call "not aggressive in nature" from Sica telling him that Neelma didn't want to talk to him and revealing his own relationship with Neelma.
"How did this make you feel? ... You were going to marry this girl," Mr Di Carlo asked Jasveer.
Mr Singh said: "If she was happy with Max, it was better for me to back out".
Mr Singh and other employees were with Neelma's parents, Shirley and Vijay Singh, in Fiji at about 8pm (local time), on the night they heard that three bodies had been found at their Brisbane home.
Jasveer Singh told the court he received a phone call about shots fired in Brisbane but did not have specific recollections.
He said there was lots of crying and the Singhs hastily made arrangements to return to Australia.
Asked if he had any Fijian friends who had been to Australia or if police had asked him about Neelma cheating on him, or whether officers had ever said they were investigating him as a suspect, he said: "No".
Mr Di Carlo told the court he was not suggesting Jasveer Singh was a suspect, but wanted to know if police had explored this possibility.
Earlier today, the court heard a recording of a threatening message left on the telephone answering machine of Shirley and Vijay Singh's Brisbane home.
The speaker, a native Fijian, said: "I know where your family lives, Vijay, you f... with my family, I will f... with your's ... I'm going to rape your wife and daughters".
The committal hearing continues.
September 22, 2010 - 12:00AM
A police officer allegedly forwarded a text message from the mobile phone of a dead woman to his private phone without logging it in police investigation records, a Brisbane court has heard.
Neelma Singh, 24, and her siblings Kunal, 18, and Sidhi, 12, were found dead in the spa at their family's Bridgeman Downs home on Brisbane's northside on April 22, 2003.
Max Sica, who was Neelma's boyfriend in the months before her death, is facing three charges of murder over the deaths and has been in custody since December 2008.
His committal hearing resumed in the Brisbane Magistrates Court yesterday.
The court was told Neelma sent an angry SMS message to a man by the name of Mr Lala saying: "I heard you met Max this week, before you accuse me, get your story straight. You have no right to say what you did".
This afternoon, Sica's defence lawyer Sam Di Carlo asked investigator Detective Senior Sergeant Andrew Massingham why, according to phone records, a police officer involved in the investigation, Detective Senior Constable Philip Heery, had sent the message to his own personal phone in November 2003.
"He was not a forensic officer," Mr Di Carlo said.
Det Sen Sgt Massingham said he did not consider it unusual and was not aware of any reasons for this action.
Mr Di Carlo said the action had not been noted in formal police records.
The court heard that on other occasions, Det Sen Const Heery and other officers had followed "proper procedure" and videotaped and tape-recorded their dealings with the mobile phone in question.
Earlier today, Neelma's Fijian former boyfriend, Jasveer Singh, 27, an accountant who worked for her father's automotive business in Fiji, gave evidence.
The court heard Mr Singh and Neelma had had a sexual relationship and had discussed getting married.
Mr Singh said he had phoned his girlfriend in December 2002 to wish her a happy birthday and, after a short conversation, she said she would phone him back because she was busy.
The court heard that Mr Singh called her five more times that day, but the phone connections dropped out or she didn't answer.
Mr Singh said he received a "polite" phone call, "not aggressive in nature", from Sica telling him that Neelma didn't want to talk to him and revealing his own relationship with Neelma.
"How did this make you feel?" Mr Di Carlo asked.
Mr Singh said: "If she was happy with Max, it was better for me to back out."
Mr Singh and other employees were with Neelma's parents, Shirley and Vijay Singh, in Fiji at about eight (local time) on the night they heard that three bodies had been found at their Brisbane home.
Jasveer Singh told the court he received a phone call about shots fired in Brisbane, but did not have specific recollections of it.
Asked if he had any Fijian friends who had been to Australia or if police had asked him about Neelma cheating on him, or whether officers had ever said they were investigating him as a suspect, he said: "No".
Mr Di Carlo told the court he was not suggesting Jasveer Singh was a suspect, but wanted to know if police had explored this possibility.
The court also heard a recording of a threatening message left on the telephone answering machine of Shirley and Vijay Singh's Brisbane home.
The speaker, a native Fijian, said: "I know where your family lives, Vijay, you f... with my family, I will f... with yours ... I'm going to rape your wife and daughters."
The committal hearing continues tomorrow.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Neelma Singh's ex-boyfriend tells how he 'backed out' of relationship
From: AAP September 21, 2010 4:36PM
THE Fijian former boyfriend of a murdered Brisbane woman has told a court he thought it better to "back out" of their relationship if she'd found happiness with another man.
Neelma Singh, 24, and her siblings Kunal, 18, and Sidhi, 12, were found dead in the spa at their family's Bridgeman Downs home on Brisbane's northside on April 22, 2003.
Max Sica, who was Neelma's boyfriend in the months before her death, is facing three charges of murder over the deaths and has been in custody since December 2008.
His committal hearing resumed in the Brisbane Magistrates Court on Monday after a 10-week adjournment.
Neelma's Fijian former boyfriend, Jasveer Singh, 27, an accountant who worked for her father's automotive business in Fiji, has travelled from his homeland to give evidence at the hearing.
The trip is his first visit to Australia.
The court heard Mr Singh and Neelma had had a sexual relationship and had discussed getting married.
Sica's defence counsel, Sam Di Carlo, asked Mr Singh what he knew about a man called Max.
Mr Singh told the court Neelma had said he was just a friend who was good with computers and had a sports car.
"She never spoke ill of him," he told the court.
Mr Di Carlo asked Mr Singh about phone calls between him and Neelma on December 29, 2002, and a call from Sica.
Mr Singh said he had phoned his girlfriend to wish her a happy birthday and, after a short conversation, she said she would phone him back because she was busy.
"She was happy I called," he said.
The court heard that Mr Singh called her five more times that day, but the phone connections dropped out or she didn't answer.
Mr Singh said he received a "polite" phone call "not aggressive in nature" from Sica telling him that Neelma didn't want to talk to him and revealing his own relationship with Neelma.
"How did this make you feel? ... You were going to marry this girl," Mr Di Carlo asked Jasveer.
Mr Singh said: "If she was happy with Max, it was better for me to back out".
Mr Singh and other employees were with Neelma's parents, Shirley and Vijay Singh, in Fiji at about 8pm (local time), on the night they heard that three bodies had been found at their Brisbane home.
Jasveer Singh told the court he received a phone call about shots fired in Brisbane but did not have specific recollections.
He said there was lots of crying and the Singhs hastily made arrangements to return to Australia.
Asked if he had any Fijian friends who had been to Australia or if police had asked him about Neelma cheating on him, or whether officers had ever said they were investigating him as a suspect, he said: "No".
Mr Di Carlo told the court he was not suggesting Jasveer Singh was a suspect, but wanted to know if police had explored this possibility.
Earlier today, the court heard a recording of a threatening message left on the telephone answering machine of Shirley and Vijay Singh's Brisbane home.
The speaker, a native Fijian, said: "I know where your family lives, Vijay, you f... with my family, I will f... with your's ... I'm going to rape your wife and daughters".
The committal hearing continues.
COMMENT MADE .................................
Not too sure. (easiest to say). But I think this guy did it and he / his friend started this blog to create a smokescreen.
To you anonymous, this is only part of the comment made by you. Did not put the rest because it is only a personal attack, with hate and malice. First of all Max nor a friend of his started this blog. Max is in jail and has no access to a computer so you should know that if you would just use some intelligence. This blog only states facts which have come out at the committal hearing so far. Some have been printed in the newspapers and other facts were never printed, so they are here for all to read.
Then what you said about no injuries on his body........is that something you know for a fact? In my opinion it only furthermore shows his innocence, then of course you are entitled to yours. In the meantime you are always welcome to just read on.
To you anonymous, this is only part of the comment made by you. Did not put the rest because it is only a personal attack, with hate and malice. First of all Max nor a friend of his started this blog. Max is in jail and has no access to a computer so you should know that if you would just use some intelligence. This blog only states facts which have come out at the committal hearing so far. Some have been printed in the newspapers and other facts were never printed, so they are here for all to read.
Then what you said about no injuries on his body........is that something you know for a fact? In my opinion it only furthermore shows his innocence, then of course you are entitled to yours. In the meantime you are always welcome to just read on.
Monday, September 20, 2010
COMMITTAL HEARING STARTS AGAIN
Sica defence tells court of angry SMS from Neelma Singh to another man before her death
Petrina Berry From: The Courier-Mail September 20, 2010 8:00PM
AN acrimonious message was sent by Neelma Singh to a man the night before she and her siblings were killed in their Brisbane home, a court has heard.
Neelma, 24, and siblings Kunal, 18, and Sidhi, 12, were found dead in their Bridgeman Downs home, on Brisbane's northside, in April 2003.
Max Sica, Neelma's former boyfriend, is facing three charges of murder over the deaths. His committal hearing resumed in the Brisbane Magistrates Court yesterday after a 10-week adjournment.
Sica's defence counsel, Sam Di Carlo, told the court Neelma sent an angry SMS message to a man by the name of Mr Lala, saying: "Before you accuse me, get your story straight. You have no right to say what you did".
"Then there is a message from him (Mr Lala) the following morning, at 9.55am, which states: 'Can you meet me at the park behind my old house at 10.30am'," Mr Di Carlo said.
"This was almost the last contact, other than with Max Sica, with a person who appears she (Neelma) had some acrimony with in respect of bad-mouthing her around the place and he wants to meet her at 10.30. In the meantime she's dead."
Mr Di Carlo asked investigator Detective Senior Sergeant Andrew Massingham what inquiries police had made into Mr Lala.
Det Sen Sgt Massingham said statements from Mr Lala and his parents were taken and police understood he was at a wedding in bayside Sandgate the night before the Singhs were found dead.
Mr Di Carlo asked what other investigations were conducted into Mr Lala, including finding where he was at the time he replied to Neelma's text message the following morning. Det Sen Sgt Massingham said further inquiries would have been made.
"That inquiry (which mobile tower the message came from) would have been made by the intel (intelligence) office at this time. I don't have any recollection as to which tower it may or may not have bounced off," he said.
Mr Di Carlo told the court: "You (police) may not have been interested in anyone else but Max (Sica)."
Earlier in the day, the court heard an accusation that the children's mother, Shirley Singh, was having an affair with a younger man.
Psychic reader Helen Hextall told the court about the many conversations she had with Ms Singh before the murders.
She said Ms Singh had spoken of her affair with an Australian man 10 years her junior.
"She asked me if I thought he was a player," Ms Hextall said.
The hearing resumes on Tuesday.
Petrina Berry From: The Courier-Mail September 20, 2010 8:00PM
AN acrimonious message was sent by Neelma Singh to a man the night before she and her siblings were killed in their Brisbane home, a court has heard.
Neelma, 24, and siblings Kunal, 18, and Sidhi, 12, were found dead in their Bridgeman Downs home, on Brisbane's northside, in April 2003.
Max Sica, Neelma's former boyfriend, is facing three charges of murder over the deaths. His committal hearing resumed in the Brisbane Magistrates Court yesterday after a 10-week adjournment.
Sica's defence counsel, Sam Di Carlo, told the court Neelma sent an angry SMS message to a man by the name of Mr Lala, saying: "Before you accuse me, get your story straight. You have no right to say what you did".
"Then there is a message from him (Mr Lala) the following morning, at 9.55am, which states: 'Can you meet me at the park behind my old house at 10.30am'," Mr Di Carlo said.
"This was almost the last contact, other than with Max Sica, with a person who appears she (Neelma) had some acrimony with in respect of bad-mouthing her around the place and he wants to meet her at 10.30. In the meantime she's dead."
Mr Di Carlo asked investigator Detective Senior Sergeant Andrew Massingham what inquiries police had made into Mr Lala.
Det Sen Sgt Massingham said statements from Mr Lala and his parents were taken and police understood he was at a wedding in bayside Sandgate the night before the Singhs were found dead.
Mr Di Carlo asked what other investigations were conducted into Mr Lala, including finding where he was at the time he replied to Neelma's text message the following morning. Det Sen Sgt Massingham said further inquiries would have been made.
"That inquiry (which mobile tower the message came from) would have been made by the intel (intelligence) office at this time. I don't have any recollection as to which tower it may or may not have bounced off," he said.
Mr Di Carlo told the court: "You (police) may not have been interested in anyone else but Max (Sica)."
Earlier in the day, the court heard an accusation that the children's mother, Shirley Singh, was having an affair with a younger man.
Psychic reader Helen Hextall told the court about the many conversations she had with Ms Singh before the murders.
She said Ms Singh had spoken of her affair with an Australian man 10 years her junior.
"She asked me if I thought he was a player," Ms Hextall said.
The hearing resumes on Tuesday.
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
BLOW TO CROWN CASE
For five and a half years police have worked on the Singh murders. This operation has been described as the most complex and largest investigation in QLD history.
On Monday 21/04/03 Max went and picked up his two children, (12 and 5 yrs of age) and took them to Mcdonalds for breakfast. They went through the drive through between 7.15-7.30am, before going to Ironbark Gully Park. The police siezed camera surveillence from Mcdonalds, within two days from the inside of the restaurant. At 7.05am a man, woman, girl and boy entered the restaurant. They are the very first customers. The man appears to have black hair and looks similar to Max. The man is wearing shorts, a white t-shirt, sandals and watch on his wrist. The young boy has a healthy built and the young girl has long hair reaching below her shoulders, with a bandana on her head. The police believe that this footage was of Max and his children. "Watch" was a main part of the investigation. I guess they thought what any normal person would do, perhaps Max got rid of the watch or got it repaired because he had DNA, BLOOD OR EVIDENCE of water from the spa bath or any other forensic material in it. They even questioned members of the family about it during the CMC hearing in 2006.
Today, a witness, a mother identified the children on the footage as not hers. Max`s daughter who was five at the time had short, ear length (bob)style hair cut. She never wore a bandana. Her record of interview with police on the 23rd of April 2003 shows her hairstyle. The male in the footage appears fuller (chubbier) than Max. The ex-wife couldnt identify Max or her son on the footage either. It doesnt matter to the police what Max or his family has said in their record of interviews. Even Max`s family knew that the footage was not of Max and the children.
As seen on SBS on (every family`s nightmare) last week, its clear that the qld police has chosen the "normative" method rather than the eliminative. They made up their mind from the word go (22/04/03 when Max`s home was described as a secondary crime scene) that Max was responsible for the murders and spent six years building the case around him. (there is evidence of witnesses including a major witness for the crown case, who is yet to come to build up more circumstantial evidence for the investigation, after Max had been charged for the murders in late 2008). But we must give credit to the QLD police because they did use the eliminative method in the end, only to eliminate everyone else and focus their entire cirumstantial evidence on Max Sica. Amazing how they never found any shred of DNA, BLOOD, or any other form of evidence against Max, despite his items (from the Sica house) being siezed on the early hours of the 23rd of April 03, prior to which Max had spent roughly 18 hours in police custody.
The police even had the chance to corrobrate Max`s items of clothing over the weekend, but never even bothered to ask anybody what Max had been wearing on days prior to the discovery.
Neelma`s ex boyfriend (who also exchanged sms messages between Sunday and Monday morning with Neelma) also said he was in bed between 12 and 630am. Police chose to believe him (and his family) yet claim they used the eliminative system from the start, trying to keep an "open mind". They never showed anybody the vehicle or the photoboard of her ex boyfriend or anyone else as has been done to Max. They never believed Max or his family when they individualy testified (while Max was being interviewed by the police just after the discovery of the bodies) to max being asleep at home. This is despite Max`s brother telling them that he checked on Max that night to discuss something with him and saw that he was in bed asleep.(he did this after he had dropped off a family friend back to her house after she had spent the night with him at the Sica residence) This happened after midnight on the 20th of April 03 `the night the police allege the murders had occured'. There are so many examples that can be given about the crime case that really does not make much sense. Maybe thats why they dont want to tell the defence what their case actually is, ie: what they are alleging occured on the night of the "DEATHS".
On one hand, its a premeditated approach, on the other (a spur of the moment), (a crime of passion) approach. They have circumstantial theories to back both avenues up. Its clear to even a blind person that the police have used a normative approach in this investigation. They dont care if Max is innocent, for them who better than an ex criminal, especially one that was involved in burning down a police station???. They just want their promotion, and to keep a face in front of society. They all seem to have forgotten the pledge they took of honesty and integrity, and the faith that the public have in them for truth and justice.
I guess unless you feel the entire weight of the injustice from these very people in whom you place your trust in, you will never know what it means to feel "EVERY FAMILY`S NIGHTMARE". Please do watch for the sex charges to go to trial as the injustice in that case and the normitive way in which the police formed their crown case against Max will be exposed with CRUTIAL evidence which the police would have known if they ever bothered to ask any members of the family, and really it would have helped the crown in their case as at that time none of the Sica family members knew the details about the allegation.
I bet you anything that when the crowns major witness Mrs Bowman, is called to testify, that at least one member of the media will be present to report on it.
As for us we believe in a higher authority beyond this world, we believe in the one and only true God to whom we pray for justice in this matter for the sakes of Neelma, Kunal, Sidhi and Max.
On Monday 21/04/03 Max went and picked up his two children, (12 and 5 yrs of age) and took them to Mcdonalds for breakfast. They went through the drive through between 7.15-7.30am, before going to Ironbark Gully Park. The police siezed camera surveillence from Mcdonalds, within two days from the inside of the restaurant. At 7.05am a man, woman, girl and boy entered the restaurant. They are the very first customers. The man appears to have black hair and looks similar to Max. The man is wearing shorts, a white t-shirt, sandals and watch on his wrist. The young boy has a healthy built and the young girl has long hair reaching below her shoulders, with a bandana on her head. The police believe that this footage was of Max and his children. "Watch" was a main part of the investigation. I guess they thought what any normal person would do, perhaps Max got rid of the watch or got it repaired because he had DNA, BLOOD OR EVIDENCE of water from the spa bath or any other forensic material in it. They even questioned members of the family about it during the CMC hearing in 2006.
Today, a witness, a mother identified the children on the footage as not hers. Max`s daughter who was five at the time had short, ear length (bob)style hair cut. She never wore a bandana. Her record of interview with police on the 23rd of April 2003 shows her hairstyle. The male in the footage appears fuller (chubbier) than Max. The ex-wife couldnt identify Max or her son on the footage either. It doesnt matter to the police what Max or his family has said in their record of interviews. Even Max`s family knew that the footage was not of Max and the children.
As seen on SBS on (every family`s nightmare) last week, its clear that the qld police has chosen the "normative" method rather than the eliminative. They made up their mind from the word go (22/04/03 when Max`s home was described as a secondary crime scene) that Max was responsible for the murders and spent six years building the case around him. (there is evidence of witnesses including a major witness for the crown case, who is yet to come to build up more circumstantial evidence for the investigation, after Max had been charged for the murders in late 2008). But we must give credit to the QLD police because they did use the eliminative method in the end, only to eliminate everyone else and focus their entire cirumstantial evidence on Max Sica. Amazing how they never found any shred of DNA, BLOOD, or any other form of evidence against Max, despite his items (from the Sica house) being siezed on the early hours of the 23rd of April 03, prior to which Max had spent roughly 18 hours in police custody.
The police even had the chance to corrobrate Max`s items of clothing over the weekend, but never even bothered to ask anybody what Max had been wearing on days prior to the discovery.
Neelma`s ex boyfriend (who also exchanged sms messages between Sunday and Monday morning with Neelma) also said he was in bed between 12 and 630am. Police chose to believe him (and his family) yet claim they used the eliminative system from the start, trying to keep an "open mind". They never showed anybody the vehicle or the photoboard of her ex boyfriend or anyone else as has been done to Max. They never believed Max or his family when they individualy testified (while Max was being interviewed by the police just after the discovery of the bodies) to max being asleep at home. This is despite Max`s brother telling them that he checked on Max that night to discuss something with him and saw that he was in bed asleep.(he did this after he had dropped off a family friend back to her house after she had spent the night with him at the Sica residence) This happened after midnight on the 20th of April 03 `the night the police allege the murders had occured'. There are so many examples that can be given about the crime case that really does not make much sense. Maybe thats why they dont want to tell the defence what their case actually is, ie: what they are alleging occured on the night of the "DEATHS".
On one hand, its a premeditated approach, on the other (a spur of the moment), (a crime of passion) approach. They have circumstantial theories to back both avenues up. Its clear to even a blind person that the police have used a normative approach in this investigation. They dont care if Max is innocent, for them who better than an ex criminal, especially one that was involved in burning down a police station???. They just want their promotion, and to keep a face in front of society. They all seem to have forgotten the pledge they took of honesty and integrity, and the faith that the public have in them for truth and justice.
I guess unless you feel the entire weight of the injustice from these very people in whom you place your trust in, you will never know what it means to feel "EVERY FAMILY`S NIGHTMARE". Please do watch for the sex charges to go to trial as the injustice in that case and the normitive way in which the police formed their crown case against Max will be exposed with CRUTIAL evidence which the police would have known if they ever bothered to ask any members of the family, and really it would have helped the crown in their case as at that time none of the Sica family members knew the details about the allegation.
I bet you anything that when the crowns major witness Mrs Bowman, is called to testify, that at least one member of the media will be present to report on it.
As for us we believe in a higher authority beyond this world, we believe in the one and only true God to whom we pray for justice in this matter for the sakes of Neelma, Kunal, Sidhi and Max.
Thursday, May 6, 2010
INVESTIGATOR CREEPED OUT BY SICA
Investigator 'creeped out' by Sica AMELIA BENTLEY
May 5, 2010 - 6:18AM
Accused killer Max Sica allegedly held his victim's hand as she lay dead in a spa bath, a Brisbane court has heard.
In the continuation of a committal hearing for Mr Sica, accused of the brutal slaying of his on-and-off girlfriend Neelma, 24, her 18-year-old brother Kunal and 12-year-sister Sidhi Singh seven years ago, Brisbane Magistrates Court yesterday heard evidence from a private investigator involved in the murder inquiry.
Brenda Sanche, who met with Mr Sica several times after the suburban killings, told detectives investigating the murders she became "creeped out" by Mr Sica who she believed was "obsessed" with the exact time of the Singhs' deaths and why their bodies were dumped in a hot spa bath.
Sica case in turmoil as lawyer demands cash
Sica 'forced into small socks'
Ms Sanche, who was not present in court but whose evidence was played via a recorded interview with police, said Mr Sica told her how he discovered the bodies of the Singhs when he let himself in to their home through an open garage door in April 2003.
He told her how, after seeing the bodies in the spa, he had held Neelma's hand before emergency services arrived at the crime scene in Grass Tree Close, Bridgeman Downs, in Brisbane's north.
Ms Sanche said she found that piece of information "really weird" and said she "thought he was lying" about parts of his story after she studied his body language.
After having coffee with Mr Sica several times in the months following the killings, Ms Sanche said she was "creeped out".
"I was feeling kinda creeped out about Max. Just things he said ... every conversation we had he wanted to know the time of death ... he was obsessed with the time of death," she said.
Mr Sica also was fixated on the security system installed at the Singhs' home, telling Ms Sanche the system had "laser beams" which could detect people in the home.
He also continually spoke about how the bodies had been left in hot water, saying: "Everybody knows it's cold water that gets rid of evidence".
But Ms Sanche said she did not think Mr Sica believed that statement, saying she thought he would have known it was hot water rather than cold which could wash away evidence.
Ms Sanche said an associate named Greg had told her Mr Sica had "looked into my eyes and said he didn't do this" and Greg believed him.
"He's telling me to believe him, but things just didn't make sense in my head," she said.
Following a five-and-a-half-year investigation into the Singh murders, Mr Sica was arrested and charged the murders of the Singh siblings.
The 40-year-old father of three from Stafford Heights, in Brisbane's north, denies the charges.
Since his arrest in November 2008 and following two failed applications for bail, Mr Sica has been in jail on remand awaiting the outcome of a trial.
The committal hearing, in which Magistrate Brian Hine will determine if there is enough evidence for the case to proceed to trial, continues today.
OBSESSED WITH SINGH`S TIME OF DEATH AND WHY BODIES WERE DUMPED IN HOT SPA BATH.... Max Sica was devestated at finding Neelma, Kunal and Sidhi dead in a spa. He as much as anyone wanted to know who did this. The police when interviewing him the first time had asked him who he thought had done it, he replied how would i know, but if i did, pray i dont get to them first. He then told the investigating officer i did not do this if that`s what your thinking. Then he soon came to realize that he was their prime suspect.
As for Ms Sanche, the so called investigator, she was on her first job when she met Max and was an understudy for the actual real investigator, Greg, the person she says was an associate. Ms Sanche at that stage had no qualifications whatsoever to be an investigator let alone analysing someones body language. But like everything else about this case, each and all are entitled to have their say about what they assume, what they allege and what they then acutally know.
May 5, 2010 - 6:18AM
Accused killer Max Sica allegedly held his victim's hand as she lay dead in a spa bath, a Brisbane court has heard.
In the continuation of a committal hearing for Mr Sica, accused of the brutal slaying of his on-and-off girlfriend Neelma, 24, her 18-year-old brother Kunal and 12-year-sister Sidhi Singh seven years ago, Brisbane Magistrates Court yesterday heard evidence from a private investigator involved in the murder inquiry.
Brenda Sanche, who met with Mr Sica several times after the suburban killings, told detectives investigating the murders she became "creeped out" by Mr Sica who she believed was "obsessed" with the exact time of the Singhs' deaths and why their bodies were dumped in a hot spa bath.
Sica case in turmoil as lawyer demands cash
Sica 'forced into small socks'
Ms Sanche, who was not present in court but whose evidence was played via a recorded interview with police, said Mr Sica told her how he discovered the bodies of the Singhs when he let himself in to their home through an open garage door in April 2003.
He told her how, after seeing the bodies in the spa, he had held Neelma's hand before emergency services arrived at the crime scene in Grass Tree Close, Bridgeman Downs, in Brisbane's north.
Ms Sanche said she found that piece of information "really weird" and said she "thought he was lying" about parts of his story after she studied his body language.
After having coffee with Mr Sica several times in the months following the killings, Ms Sanche said she was "creeped out".
"I was feeling kinda creeped out about Max. Just things he said ... every conversation we had he wanted to know the time of death ... he was obsessed with the time of death," she said.
Mr Sica also was fixated on the security system installed at the Singhs' home, telling Ms Sanche the system had "laser beams" which could detect people in the home.
He also continually spoke about how the bodies had been left in hot water, saying: "Everybody knows it's cold water that gets rid of evidence".
But Ms Sanche said she did not think Mr Sica believed that statement, saying she thought he would have known it was hot water rather than cold which could wash away evidence.
Ms Sanche said an associate named Greg had told her Mr Sica had "looked into my eyes and said he didn't do this" and Greg believed him.
"He's telling me to believe him, but things just didn't make sense in my head," she said.
Following a five-and-a-half-year investigation into the Singh murders, Mr Sica was arrested and charged the murders of the Singh siblings.
The 40-year-old father of three from Stafford Heights, in Brisbane's north, denies the charges.
Since his arrest in November 2008 and following two failed applications for bail, Mr Sica has been in jail on remand awaiting the outcome of a trial.
The committal hearing, in which Magistrate Brian Hine will determine if there is enough evidence for the case to proceed to trial, continues today.
OBSESSED WITH SINGH`S TIME OF DEATH AND WHY BODIES WERE DUMPED IN HOT SPA BATH.... Max Sica was devestated at finding Neelma, Kunal and Sidhi dead in a spa. He as much as anyone wanted to know who did this. The police when interviewing him the first time had asked him who he thought had done it, he replied how would i know, but if i did, pray i dont get to them first. He then told the investigating officer i did not do this if that`s what your thinking. Then he soon came to realize that he was their prime suspect.
As for Ms Sanche, the so called investigator, she was on her first job when she met Max and was an understudy for the actual real investigator, Greg, the person she says was an associate. Ms Sanche at that stage had no qualifications whatsoever to be an investigator let alone analysing someones body language. But like everything else about this case, each and all are entitled to have their say about what they assume, what they allege and what they then acutally know.
BLEACHED FEET ARTICLE
Bleached feet used in murder investigation
AMELIA BENTLEY April 30, 2010
Police officers dipped their feet in bleach solutions and walked on carpet samples while investigating the murders of the Singh siblings at their north Brisbane home seven years ago, a court has been told.
Former flight attendant Neelma, 24, student Kunal, 18 and 12-year-old Sidhi Singh were found slain in their Bridgeman Downs home in April 2003, while their parents were away in Fiji.
Neelma's on-and-off boyfriend, former neighbour Max Sica, now 40, was charged with their murders in late 2008 following a five year investigation into the grisly killings.
------------------------
Sica 'forced into small socks'
------------------------
Yesterday during Mr Sica's committal hearing, the Brisbane Magistrates Court was told the police experiment was done in order to mimic the Singhs' killer, who police allege left bleach-stained foot prints on carpet at the murder scene.
Police have alleged Mr Sica used bleach to clean part of the Singhs' home after he strangled Neelma, bashed and then drowned Kunal and bludgeoned Sidhi to death.
Yesterday afternoon, defence barrister Sam Di Carlo questioned scientist Richard Mattner, who discovered bleach traces on several items taken from the Singhs home following the discovery of the siblings' bodies.
Mr Mattner said he remembered police officers involved in the investigation soaked their feet in buckets of bleach solutions and walked up and down carpets in order to re-create footprints found at the murder scene.
"Initially, it was hoped to simulate footprints on carpet. It was bare feet ... I believe it was quite unsuccessful," he said.
Mr Mattner said he remembered police were "disappointed with the results" because they had been unable to make a path of footprints like the ones discovered at the Grass Tree Close home.
"I suggested a way to produce more footprints was to put a pair of socks on," he said.
Mr Mattner denied police pressured him to make particular findings about footprints in bleach on carpet.
But he said it was true he emailed a colleague in July 2003 regarding the Singh murders investigation, which said: "The detectives say the evidence is critical since they don't have much to hang their hats on".
Mr Mattner said he had been referring to "confirmatory tests" to double-check his work.
"This was an important case, clearly," he said.
Carpet from vehicles used by Mr Sica around the time of the killings was also tested for bleach traces, Mr Mattner said.
There were areas which, to the naked eye, appeared as though bleach had come in contact.
But back at his laboratory, Mr Mattner said he found no evidence of bleach product.
The committal hearing, which began in August last year and was adjourned several times before resuming earlier this month, continues today.
YES AND THIS PROVES WHAT? JUST MORE ASSUMPTIONS, ALLEGATIONS AND INUENDO`S
AMELIA BENTLEY April 30, 2010
Police officers dipped their feet in bleach solutions and walked on carpet samples while investigating the murders of the Singh siblings at their north Brisbane home seven years ago, a court has been told.
Former flight attendant Neelma, 24, student Kunal, 18 and 12-year-old Sidhi Singh were found slain in their Bridgeman Downs home in April 2003, while their parents were away in Fiji.
Neelma's on-and-off boyfriend, former neighbour Max Sica, now 40, was charged with their murders in late 2008 following a five year investigation into the grisly killings.
------------------------
Sica 'forced into small socks'
------------------------
Yesterday during Mr Sica's committal hearing, the Brisbane Magistrates Court was told the police experiment was done in order to mimic the Singhs' killer, who police allege left bleach-stained foot prints on carpet at the murder scene.
Police have alleged Mr Sica used bleach to clean part of the Singhs' home after he strangled Neelma, bashed and then drowned Kunal and bludgeoned Sidhi to death.
Yesterday afternoon, defence barrister Sam Di Carlo questioned scientist Richard Mattner, who discovered bleach traces on several items taken from the Singhs home following the discovery of the siblings' bodies.
Mr Mattner said he remembered police officers involved in the investigation soaked their feet in buckets of bleach solutions and walked up and down carpets in order to re-create footprints found at the murder scene.
"Initially, it was hoped to simulate footprints on carpet. It was bare feet ... I believe it was quite unsuccessful," he said.
Mr Mattner said he remembered police were "disappointed with the results" because they had been unable to make a path of footprints like the ones discovered at the Grass Tree Close home.
"I suggested a way to produce more footprints was to put a pair of socks on," he said.
Mr Mattner denied police pressured him to make particular findings about footprints in bleach on carpet.
But he said it was true he emailed a colleague in July 2003 regarding the Singh murders investigation, which said: "The detectives say the evidence is critical since they don't have much to hang their hats on".
Mr Mattner said he had been referring to "confirmatory tests" to double-check his work.
"This was an important case, clearly," he said.
Carpet from vehicles used by Mr Sica around the time of the killings was also tested for bleach traces, Mr Mattner said.
There were areas which, to the naked eye, appeared as though bleach had come in contact.
But back at his laboratory, Mr Mattner said he found no evidence of bleach product.
The committal hearing, which began in August last year and was adjourned several times before resuming earlier this month, continues today.
YES AND THIS PROVES WHAT? JUST MORE ASSUMPTIONS, ALLEGATIONS AND INUENDO`S
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
