First of all please decide if Neelma was scared of Max or in love with Max. If Neelma was scared of Max she would not let him in dont you think? There would actually be a sign of forced entry.
DNA on cigarette butts, well as you must know, Max was there on many occassions, he smoked in the garage, around the house etc and he smoked there even before the 13th, 15th, 17th and on the actual day 22nd of April.
Yes there was a text message sent by Neelma to Max at 857pm Easter Sunday night but there were also these calls directly from police logs................................
ARTICLE FROM BRISBANE TIMES 2nd SEPTEMBER 2009
Detective Zitny said after the text was sent(at 8.57pm)on the night of Easter Sunday, there was a call from the Sica home phone to the Singh's home phone - a call which lasted for two minutes and 35 seconds. Neelma then rang Sica's mobile phone for one second, which is followed by another 34-second call from Sica's to her mobile phone at 11.10pm.
When Max says that they decided not to see eachother that night, it is fully believable. Any person has to be judged with presumption of innocence.
No sign of forced entry.... That does not point a finger to anyone since any person would open the door to all the people they know. The Singh`s would have known a lot of people, also the mother`s massage business was conducted from the home and it is a point to be considered as even strangers were let in.
There are some conflicting statements of the time when Max arrived at the Singh house on that day, there are also statements saying that Max had taken his sister to a beautician at Stafford at that time, then passed by his house and then gone to drop off a video, all before he got to the Singh`s home. The tradie as you put it was spoken to before the discovery.
Neelma had spoken to Max on the Thursday and asked if he had pain killers for she had a sore arm, his father gave him some panadeine forte to take to her and they were found at the scene. But im sure you know that. As for the diary, i wonder about ALL the things that were written in it and when it went missing. There is also written evidence stating that Neelma was scared of her father and was also concerned for her siblings welfare.
Apart from some other objects taken, why would Max have taken a piece of jewellery he gave Neelma? If a person wanted it to look like a robbery, they would have taken lots of other things. It could be viewed as a setup.
As for you final comment, why mention some piece of clothing if you would have known what one was wearing? That to me is senseless. If one did, they would have said i dont know, did not take any notice, was not paying attention etc etc. or name the item of clothing as it was.
When Max saw the horrendous image in front of him, he could not believe what he was looking at, he held Neelma`s hand and saw everything and everyone in the spa, he was standing right over it.
To finish off it was said by the coroner that the time of death is estimated to be anywhere from three days to six hours prior to the discovery of the bodies.
Please do put a name to your thoughts, you dont need to hide behind an anonymous signiture. Even though i can understand how it could be easier for you. Nightmares are what Max and his family go through every day. If you think you know me, (which i doubt) why continue writing as anonymous? One answer i will give you, is that i do not have the need to deny or justify anything, as Massimo is an innocent person. It took them nearly seven years to enforce a circumstancial case which is based on innuendo`s, unfounded assumptions, and sway public opinion by using the media to their advantage. STILL they end up with what i dont even call a weak case but an absurd one. Breaking all the rules of human rights. Remember that a person is INNONCENT until proven GUILTY (we all want the real culprit/s not just an easy target)
An example of injustice is the story of Graham Stafford, all the so called evidence they had against him was later discredited and it was amazing as to how he was ever charged in the first place. Think about it....... whomever you are.
Friday, February 19, 2010
Thursday, February 18, 2010
YES, POINTS OF INTEREST..........
Tristan SwanwickA SUPREME Court judge has described the Crown case againstaccused triple murderer Max Sica as"less than compelling".
Sica has been in custody sinceDecember 2008 when he was arrested for the murders of his former girlfriend Neelrna Singh, 24, and her siblings,Kunal, 18, and Sidhi, 12.
Justice Richard Chesterman, indismissing the ~ccused man's latest bid to be released on bail, said the only evidence capable of directly linking Sica to the 2003 murders was footprint impressions found at the crime scene." (However) it is not possible to say the extent! to which it might provide that link," he said in his written decision.
Justice Chesterrnan detailed evidence from Canadian policeman and expert in "footprint morphology"Robert Kennedy. Mr Kennedy had concluded that there was "strong support" for the theory that foot impressions found at the scene were made by Sica. However, under cross examination he changed his position by saying there was "support"for the theory, but not "strong support"."The footprints apart, the only evidence establishing the appellant's presence in the house on 20 April 2003 is circumstantial," JusticeChesterman said. "The most that can be said is that the Crown case is not without substance but is less than compelling."However Justice Chesterman, upholding the decision of the SupremeCourt in December to deny Sica bail, conceded that a proper assessment of the evidence could not be conducted until the completion of the committal hearing. Other evidence against Sica detailed by Justice Chesterman included:• Sica admitted visiting the Singhhouse on April 13, 15 and 17, but denied being present on April 20,when police believe the murder soccurred. • A text message to Sica found on Neelma's mobile phone suggested she expected him to visit on the night of the murders. • There was no sign of forced entry to the house. • Jewellery owned by Neelma, including an item given to her by Sica, had been stolen while other more valuable property was untouched. • Her diary was also taken. • A cigarette butt with Sica's DNA was found outside the rear door. • On the night after the killings, Sica activated a program to delete all data from his computer. Sica's committal hearing, which will determine if he will stand trial, is ongoing.
Justice Chesterman was scathing of defence lawyers' handling of the case, rejecting protests their client was "languishing in prison" and saying a six-month committal hearing was "unnecessary and wasteful".
(When police BELIEVE murders occurred being the key word. Plus they have statements from family members and others who saw him at home on thatEaster Sunday night)
(Max and Neelma also spoke via phone on that same Easter Sunday night at 11.10pm, txt message was sent at 8.57pm. Neelma was not feeling well that night and there is a statement of one of Kunal Singh`s friend saying that Kunal had told him not to come over that night because his sister was not well.)
(No sign of forced entry does not mean that Max was the only person they knew and would let in. They might have answered the door to someone whom they did not know or might have pretented to be in need of help so as to gain entry.)
(Not only Neelma`s jewellery was taken and why would Max have taken an item of jewellery that he had given her? A bloodied pillow was taken away from the scene of the crime and police did not even notice.)
(Neelma`s diary was taken, yes i wonder by whom and when it was taken.)
(Cigarette butts containing Max`s DNA were not only found outside the rear door but also in a make shift ashtray in the garage (along with butts which had Neelma`s DNA on them) and butts containing Max`s DNA were found near gutters and in grassaround the house. Max and Neelma use to smoke in the garage and outside the house.)
(As for the the program that was running on Max`s computer, it was a program called cyber scrub and anyone could have bought it or downloaded it from the internet. The police themselves have said that Max knew quite a bit about computers, well dont you think that if he wanted to get rid of whatever, he would have taken out the hard drive and smashed it to bits? For the only way of getting rid of data from your computer is by doing exactly that. As long as you have a hard drive, info can be retrieved. Even i know that and im not a computer expert of anykind. Police took the hard drive out and sent it to America and they have all the data that was on it.)
I would also like to add that police only theorize that the Singh children were killed on late Sunday night early Monday morning. Max had gone to pick up his kids at 7.15 am on Monday morning and they have proof of this. Also bone chilling screams that were heard at around 8.30pm Monday night and around 12 or 12.08am Tuesday morning have never been confirmed as not coming from the Singh house or from anywhere else. A Mr Paul Surri was adament he saw Sidhi Singh outside the front of her house on the Easter Monday morning, police tried to tell him that he must have been mistaken, but he insisted it was then. A man was seen at around 5.30 am Tuesday morning, two women taking a walk had seen him and when this man saw them coming, he apparently ran off towards the Singh house and jumped a fence. An identicate of this man was given to the police, i didnt see it on any newspaper or news program, i would have thought it would have been of great interest and importance. BUT im sure police have their reasons for proceeding the way they have, especially when Max was their prime suspect from the very first day. Please dont tell me that this would not entail them having tunnel vision and focusing mostly and primarily on Max Sica......... JUSTICE ........ as for Sam Di Carlo who is defending Max, all i can say is that this man has, and is, giving it his all. The police have had all these years to do their so called job, they have stated that this is one of the biggest criminal cases in QLD`S history, they have all the resources and back up house that they need, Mr Sam Di Carlo is then a superhuman who must with extremely limited resources, funds and back up try to defend someone who has been put in this position. Good job Mr Di Carlo, there should be more like you.
Sica has been in custody sinceDecember 2008 when he was arrested for the murders of his former girlfriend Neelrna Singh, 24, and her siblings,Kunal, 18, and Sidhi, 12.
Justice Richard Chesterman, indismissing the ~ccused man's latest bid to be released on bail, said the only evidence capable of directly linking Sica to the 2003 murders was footprint impressions found at the crime scene." (However) it is not possible to say the extent! to which it might provide that link," he said in his written decision.
Justice Chesterrnan detailed evidence from Canadian policeman and expert in "footprint morphology"Robert Kennedy. Mr Kennedy had concluded that there was "strong support" for the theory that foot impressions found at the scene were made by Sica. However, under cross examination he changed his position by saying there was "support"for the theory, but not "strong support"."The footprints apart, the only evidence establishing the appellant's presence in the house on 20 April 2003 is circumstantial," JusticeChesterman said. "The most that can be said is that the Crown case is not without substance but is less than compelling."However Justice Chesterman, upholding the decision of the SupremeCourt in December to deny Sica bail, conceded that a proper assessment of the evidence could not be conducted until the completion of the committal hearing. Other evidence against Sica detailed by Justice Chesterman included:• Sica admitted visiting the Singhhouse on April 13, 15 and 17, but denied being present on April 20,when police believe the murder soccurred. • A text message to Sica found on Neelma's mobile phone suggested she expected him to visit on the night of the murders. • There was no sign of forced entry to the house. • Jewellery owned by Neelma, including an item given to her by Sica, had been stolen while other more valuable property was untouched. • Her diary was also taken. • A cigarette butt with Sica's DNA was found outside the rear door. • On the night after the killings, Sica activated a program to delete all data from his computer. Sica's committal hearing, which will determine if he will stand trial, is ongoing.
Justice Chesterman was scathing of defence lawyers' handling of the case, rejecting protests their client was "languishing in prison" and saying a six-month committal hearing was "unnecessary and wasteful".
(When police BELIEVE murders occurred being the key word. Plus they have statements from family members and others who saw him at home on thatEaster Sunday night)
(Max and Neelma also spoke via phone on that same Easter Sunday night at 11.10pm, txt message was sent at 8.57pm. Neelma was not feeling well that night and there is a statement of one of Kunal Singh`s friend saying that Kunal had told him not to come over that night because his sister was not well.)
(No sign of forced entry does not mean that Max was the only person they knew and would let in. They might have answered the door to someone whom they did not know or might have pretented to be in need of help so as to gain entry.)
(Not only Neelma`s jewellery was taken and why would Max have taken an item of jewellery that he had given her? A bloodied pillow was taken away from the scene of the crime and police did not even notice.)
(Neelma`s diary was taken, yes i wonder by whom and when it was taken.)
(Cigarette butts containing Max`s DNA were not only found outside the rear door but also in a make shift ashtray in the garage (along with butts which had Neelma`s DNA on them) and butts containing Max`s DNA were found near gutters and in grassaround the house. Max and Neelma use to smoke in the garage and outside the house.)
(As for the the program that was running on Max`s computer, it was a program called cyber scrub and anyone could have bought it or downloaded it from the internet. The police themselves have said that Max knew quite a bit about computers, well dont you think that if he wanted to get rid of whatever, he would have taken out the hard drive and smashed it to bits? For the only way of getting rid of data from your computer is by doing exactly that. As long as you have a hard drive, info can be retrieved. Even i know that and im not a computer expert of anykind. Police took the hard drive out and sent it to America and they have all the data that was on it.)
I would also like to add that police only theorize that the Singh children were killed on late Sunday night early Monday morning. Max had gone to pick up his kids at 7.15 am on Monday morning and they have proof of this. Also bone chilling screams that were heard at around 8.30pm Monday night and around 12 or 12.08am Tuesday morning have never been confirmed as not coming from the Singh house or from anywhere else. A Mr Paul Surri was adament he saw Sidhi Singh outside the front of her house on the Easter Monday morning, police tried to tell him that he must have been mistaken, but he insisted it was then. A man was seen at around 5.30 am Tuesday morning, two women taking a walk had seen him and when this man saw them coming, he apparently ran off towards the Singh house and jumped a fence. An identicate of this man was given to the police, i didnt see it on any newspaper or news program, i would have thought it would have been of great interest and importance. BUT im sure police have their reasons for proceeding the way they have, especially when Max was their prime suspect from the very first day. Please dont tell me that this would not entail them having tunnel vision and focusing mostly and primarily on Max Sica......... JUSTICE ........ as for Sam Di Carlo who is defending Max, all i can say is that this man has, and is, giving it his all. The police have had all these years to do their so called job, they have stated that this is one of the biggest criminal cases in QLD`S history, they have all the resources and back up house that they need, Mr Sam Di Carlo is then a superhuman who must with extremely limited resources, funds and back up try to defend someone who has been put in this position. Good job Mr Di Carlo, there should be more like you.
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
JUSTICE DENIED
Sica court saga 'wasteful': judge
DANIEL HURST February 16, 2010
A Supreme Court judge has blasted as "wasteful" a six-month committal hearing into the murders of Brisbane's Singh children.
Justice Richard Chesterman this morning dismissed accused triple killer Max Sica's latest bail bid.
This despite his lawyers' complaints it could be late next year by the time the 40-year-old faces trial for the 2003 slayings.
Justice Chesterman upheld the decision of the Supreme Court in December to deny Sica freedom on bail for fear he would interfere with witnesses in the case and was a flight risk.
But in a written judgment, he took a swipe at both sides, accusing Crown prosecutors of gathering a weak case and Sica's defence team of dragging its feet and employing "unorthodox" methods.
"The most that can be said, I think, is that the Crown case is not without substance but is less than compelling," Justice Chesterman wrote.
He pointed to a series of bleached footprints found by forensics experts in the Singh house as among the only hard evidence gathered against Sica.
"The footprints apart, the only evidence establishing [Sica's] presence in the house on 20 April, 2003, is circumstantial," he said.
"Much, I suppose, will depend upon the percentage of the population which has a foot structure identical to that which left the bleached imprints in the carpets.
"About that we were told nothing."
Neelma, 24, Kunal, 18 and Sidhi Singh, 12, were found dead in a spa bath in their family home in Bridgeman Downs almost six years ago.
Sica, a former boyfriend of Neelma's and the first person on the scene, was not charged with the murders until 2008. He has strongly protested his innocence and complained at the length of time it has taken for the Crown to make its case.
Justice Chesterman said the Crown had presented no apparent motive for Sica to have killed Neelma, with Sica saying the pair had resumed a romantic relationship with one another.
He also said Sica's aggression towards the Singh family patriarch, Vijay Singh, did not, on the face of it, provide a motive for murdering his children.
During Sica's appeal, his barrister Sam Di Carlo said 800 witnesses would need to be "thoroughly" examined in the committal hearing, which would decide whether the accused man would stand trial.
But Justice Chesterman scoffed at that figure and suggested Mr Di Carlo had used the committal hearing in an "unorthodox" manner to flush out other suspects.
"It is inconceivable that there are 800 relevant witnesses to the facts germane to the prosecution case," he said.
"How [Sica] and his lawyers conduct the preliminary hearing is a matter for them, but if they chose, as they appear to have done, to use it for the purpose described and in a manner so extravagant of time, thereby prolonging proceedings, any complaint of delay loses most of its force.
"A committal hearing of six months' duration in a case such as this appears both unnecessary and wasteful."
Sica will remain behind bars.
The committal hearing is ongoing.
Unnecessary and wasteful..... for whom? A man has been denied his freedom, he languishes in a jail cell awaiting so called justice. The police have had nearly seven years to come up with what?
Police targeted Massimo Sica from the very beginning, he was the prime suspect for them and they have tried to build a case around that belief. The footprint impressions were found six days after the bodies were discovered, the police say that they were socked foot impressions with traces of bleach. Police took Massimo Sica`s foot impressions in 2004, a whole year after the discovery of the foot impressions at the crime scene. (they also took his footprints yet again on the day he was arrested 30th December 2008)Footprint experts Kennedy and Jones both state that they cant exclude him as making the impressions and they cant say when the impressions were actually made either. Jones also says that hundreds or thousands of people could have made the impressions.
Massimo Sica has never fled the juristiction even when he was a free man and could have gone wherever he wanted to go. He has never threatened anyone, caused bodily harm to anyone or tampered with any witnesses.
The confrontation between Mr Singh and Massimo Sica............. Massimo Sica was called to the Singh residence by the youngest child Sidhi, she was afraid for her mother`s safety. Phone records and text messages show this to be true. The police were called over to the house that day by both Mr Singh and Massimo Sica and statements were taken by all involved and the police have this as well. When you hear ALL of the taped conversation, you can hear the many threats made by Mr Singh to Massimo Sica, threats like, just you wait, you will see what i can do, you dont know what im cabable of, youre gonna get it etc Mr Singh tells Massimo Sica to get out of his house, Mrs Singh says to Massimo Sica,.... you have my permission to be here, are you going to protect me? Massimo Sica also says to Mr Singh,,,,,, dont worry, im not going to hurt you, what do you think i am like you? i am just going to wait for the cops.... Massimo Sica is also heard saying repeatedly to Mr Singh.... put the weapon down. Also on the taped conversation you can hear Mrs Singh make accusations against her husband in English and in Indian, they include accusations of abuse towards herself and her children, of molestation, of making her perform sex acts with others while he would tape it etc. The word CAPISCE means understand and not i will decapitate you or kill you. Police who arrived at the house were also heard on the tape and one officer is heard talking to Mr Singh then the officer leaves to go talk to the other officer and Mrs Singh, Neelma Singh, Sidhi Singh and Massimo Sica. When the officer returns to Mr Singh, he changes his tone and tells Mr Singh he has to leave the house, this is because he actually realizes what the truth is. Im sure police have the statements made by all involved on that day. So in reality who threatened who? When this came out and was made public, the headlines on the newspapers were..... Max Sica threatens Singh family in their own home..... Unbelievable...... He had gone there because he had calls and messages asking for help, he was told by Mrs Singh to protect her and that he had her permission to be there, he actually handled the whole situation quite calmly and without any incident. In return he was made out to be the violator and was said to be threatening etc. The only person who ever threatened, abused, violated, bashed, and mistreated the Singh family was Mr Singh himself. This coming from Mrs Singh`s own statements and from court documentation such as DVO orders, and court proceedings against him.
When Mr Singh and his daughter Neelma went to the Stafford police station to put in a complaint about Massimo Sica........... The police officer in his statement says that Neelma did not look like she wanted to be there, that her father seemed overbearing, that he asked to look at the text messages sent by Massimo Sica to her mobile phone and that upon looking at them he found nothing threatening or allarming in them at all. He also states that Mr Singh becomes somewhat loud and aggitated and says, ive done my bit, i am concerned for my daughters welfare, i wont be in the country, i have no neighbours that can keep an eye on my children while im gone, if anything happens to her it will be on your heads, then he states that Mr Singh shows him a statement he made when he had the confrontation with Massimo Sica in his house and a reciept the police gave him for the microcassette he gave to police of the confrontation.
I dont know about anyone else, but if i thought my daughter or any of my children could be in anykind of danger or thought someone might pose a threat to them, i would not leave them at all.
It is true that Massimo Sica has a criminal record for things he and a group of other boys committed a very long time ago, but he has served his time and paid very dearly for that. He has never not then, not ever, been violent to a person, threatened a person or caused bodily harm to a person in any way. He never has and would never lay a finger, let alone a hand or fist on a woman or a child.
These children were massacered, their lives were taken from them in a most brutal and horrendous way, they along with Massimo Sica (whom i consider to be the fourth victim in this tragedy) deserve true justice.
DANIEL HURST February 16, 2010
A Supreme Court judge has blasted as "wasteful" a six-month committal hearing into the murders of Brisbane's Singh children.
Justice Richard Chesterman this morning dismissed accused triple killer Max Sica's latest bail bid.
This despite his lawyers' complaints it could be late next year by the time the 40-year-old faces trial for the 2003 slayings.
Justice Chesterman upheld the decision of the Supreme Court in December to deny Sica freedom on bail for fear he would interfere with witnesses in the case and was a flight risk.
But in a written judgment, he took a swipe at both sides, accusing Crown prosecutors of gathering a weak case and Sica's defence team of dragging its feet and employing "unorthodox" methods.
"The most that can be said, I think, is that the Crown case is not without substance but is less than compelling," Justice Chesterman wrote.
He pointed to a series of bleached footprints found by forensics experts in the Singh house as among the only hard evidence gathered against Sica.
"The footprints apart, the only evidence establishing [Sica's] presence in the house on 20 April, 2003, is circumstantial," he said.
"Much, I suppose, will depend upon the percentage of the population which has a foot structure identical to that which left the bleached imprints in the carpets.
"About that we were told nothing."
Neelma, 24, Kunal, 18 and Sidhi Singh, 12, were found dead in a spa bath in their family home in Bridgeman Downs almost six years ago.
Sica, a former boyfriend of Neelma's and the first person on the scene, was not charged with the murders until 2008. He has strongly protested his innocence and complained at the length of time it has taken for the Crown to make its case.
Justice Chesterman said the Crown had presented no apparent motive for Sica to have killed Neelma, with Sica saying the pair had resumed a romantic relationship with one another.
He also said Sica's aggression towards the Singh family patriarch, Vijay Singh, did not, on the face of it, provide a motive for murdering his children.
During Sica's appeal, his barrister Sam Di Carlo said 800 witnesses would need to be "thoroughly" examined in the committal hearing, which would decide whether the accused man would stand trial.
But Justice Chesterman scoffed at that figure and suggested Mr Di Carlo had used the committal hearing in an "unorthodox" manner to flush out other suspects.
"It is inconceivable that there are 800 relevant witnesses to the facts germane to the prosecution case," he said.
"How [Sica] and his lawyers conduct the preliminary hearing is a matter for them, but if they chose, as they appear to have done, to use it for the purpose described and in a manner so extravagant of time, thereby prolonging proceedings, any complaint of delay loses most of its force.
"A committal hearing of six months' duration in a case such as this appears both unnecessary and wasteful."
Sica will remain behind bars.
The committal hearing is ongoing.
Unnecessary and wasteful..... for whom? A man has been denied his freedom, he languishes in a jail cell awaiting so called justice. The police have had nearly seven years to come up with what?
Police targeted Massimo Sica from the very beginning, he was the prime suspect for them and they have tried to build a case around that belief. The footprint impressions were found six days after the bodies were discovered, the police say that they were socked foot impressions with traces of bleach. Police took Massimo Sica`s foot impressions in 2004, a whole year after the discovery of the foot impressions at the crime scene. (they also took his footprints yet again on the day he was arrested 30th December 2008)Footprint experts Kennedy and Jones both state that they cant exclude him as making the impressions and they cant say when the impressions were actually made either. Jones also says that hundreds or thousands of people could have made the impressions.
Massimo Sica has never fled the juristiction even when he was a free man and could have gone wherever he wanted to go. He has never threatened anyone, caused bodily harm to anyone or tampered with any witnesses.
The confrontation between Mr Singh and Massimo Sica............. Massimo Sica was called to the Singh residence by the youngest child Sidhi, she was afraid for her mother`s safety. Phone records and text messages show this to be true. The police were called over to the house that day by both Mr Singh and Massimo Sica and statements were taken by all involved and the police have this as well. When you hear ALL of the taped conversation, you can hear the many threats made by Mr Singh to Massimo Sica, threats like, just you wait, you will see what i can do, you dont know what im cabable of, youre gonna get it etc Mr Singh tells Massimo Sica to get out of his house, Mrs Singh says to Massimo Sica,.... you have my permission to be here, are you going to protect me? Massimo Sica also says to Mr Singh,,,,,, dont worry, im not going to hurt you, what do you think i am like you? i am just going to wait for the cops.... Massimo Sica is also heard saying repeatedly to Mr Singh.... put the weapon down. Also on the taped conversation you can hear Mrs Singh make accusations against her husband in English and in Indian, they include accusations of abuse towards herself and her children, of molestation, of making her perform sex acts with others while he would tape it etc. The word CAPISCE means understand and not i will decapitate you or kill you. Police who arrived at the house were also heard on the tape and one officer is heard talking to Mr Singh then the officer leaves to go talk to the other officer and Mrs Singh, Neelma Singh, Sidhi Singh and Massimo Sica. When the officer returns to Mr Singh, he changes his tone and tells Mr Singh he has to leave the house, this is because he actually realizes what the truth is. Im sure police have the statements made by all involved on that day. So in reality who threatened who? When this came out and was made public, the headlines on the newspapers were..... Max Sica threatens Singh family in their own home..... Unbelievable...... He had gone there because he had calls and messages asking for help, he was told by Mrs Singh to protect her and that he had her permission to be there, he actually handled the whole situation quite calmly and without any incident. In return he was made out to be the violator and was said to be threatening etc. The only person who ever threatened, abused, violated, bashed, and mistreated the Singh family was Mr Singh himself. This coming from Mrs Singh`s own statements and from court documentation such as DVO orders, and court proceedings against him.
When Mr Singh and his daughter Neelma went to the Stafford police station to put in a complaint about Massimo Sica........... The police officer in his statement says that Neelma did not look like she wanted to be there, that her father seemed overbearing, that he asked to look at the text messages sent by Massimo Sica to her mobile phone and that upon looking at them he found nothing threatening or allarming in them at all. He also states that Mr Singh becomes somewhat loud and aggitated and says, ive done my bit, i am concerned for my daughters welfare, i wont be in the country, i have no neighbours that can keep an eye on my children while im gone, if anything happens to her it will be on your heads, then he states that Mr Singh shows him a statement he made when he had the confrontation with Massimo Sica in his house and a reciept the police gave him for the microcassette he gave to police of the confrontation.
I dont know about anyone else, but if i thought my daughter or any of my children could be in anykind of danger or thought someone might pose a threat to them, i would not leave them at all.
It is true that Massimo Sica has a criminal record for things he and a group of other boys committed a very long time ago, but he has served his time and paid very dearly for that. He has never not then, not ever, been violent to a person, threatened a person or caused bodily harm to a person in any way. He never has and would never lay a finger, let alone a hand or fist on a woman or a child.
These children were massacered, their lives were taken from them in a most brutal and horrendous way, they along with Massimo Sica (whom i consider to be the fourth victim in this tragedy) deserve true justice.
Friday, February 5, 2010
INDEED, OUTRAGEOUS
'Hired assassins' may have killed Singhs: Sica defence
AMELIA BENTLEY
The lawyer for accused triple-murderer Max Sica has suggested hired assassins could have been behind the murders of the Singh siblings, who were found slain in their Brisbane home seven years ago.
Barrister Sam Di Carlo made the comment in the Queensland Court of Appeal yesterday, where he argued his client deserved bail as he awaits trial accused of the 2003 murders of his ex-girlfriend Neelma, 24, her brother Kunal and 12-year-old sister Sidhi Singh.
The father of three from Stafford Heights, has failed in two Supreme Court bids for freedom since his November 2008 arrest for the murders.
But his lawyers took the issue to the Court of Appeal, arguing the case against Sica was "extremely weak" and he should not be kept in prison awaiting a trial which may not happen until 2012.
Mr Di Carlo said there were several others who could have been responsible for the murders - including hired assassins engaged by the siblings' father, Vijay Singh.
"There's been an abundance of evidence pointing to Mr Singh ... the day before he goes overseas he just happens to buy a bottle of bleach," he said.
Bleach, the court was told, was used to clean up parts of the scene of the murders.
During two hours of submissions, Mr Di Carlo argued Supreme Court Justice James Douglas had been mistaken when he did not have proper regard to the strength of the crown case against Sica.
He also urged Court of Appeal judges to listen to the Triple-0 call Sica made after he discovered the Singh siblings' dead in a spa bath.
"It's incredible. Short of Edward Norton in Primal Fear [Sica] must be the best actor [if he's guilty of murdering Singhs]," he said.
But Crown prosecutor Brendan Campbell told the Court of Appeal while the case against Sica was a circumstantial one, Mr Di Carlo was mistaken about much of the evidence.
"It's an outrageous suggestion the father is responsible for killing his own children," he said.
Mr Campbell said the Singhs' killer had used a garden fork to injure the siblings and then put the tool back in its usual spot.
"If it was assassins, they have used a weapon from inside the house," he said.
He denied Mr Di Carlo's suggestion police had "tunnel vision" and had decided Mr Sica was the murderer.
"Every other lead that has been raised has been chased down and excluded," he said.
The Court of Appeal has reserved its decision in the matter.
("It's an outrageous suggestion the father is responsible for killing his own children," he said.)
This is a comment made by Mr Campbell for prosecution, well i say that it is even more outrageous to think that Massimo Sica had anything at all to do with the death of the woman that he loved and her sibblings whom he also considered as part of his family.
Massimo Sica has been portrayed as being violent and so forth when there is nothing indicating him to be that way inclined, infact far from it. He has made foolish mistakes in the past, which i might add did not have anything to do with being violent or threatening towards anyone in anyway at all, and he has paid very dearly for it. HOWEVER Mr V.J. Singh has been violent, threatening, abbusive and this is against his own family members. Like i have already stated in this blog, Massimo Sica was called to the Singh residence not only on the occassion where Mr Singh happened to record it, but on other occassions as well.
That recorded episode was completely twisted and made to look like Massimo Sica had gone there to threaten the Singh family. Massimo Sica was called there by Sidhi Singh (the youngest child) because she was afraid for her mothers safety. If Massimo Sica was so violent, so threatening, so psychotic, why did he not just knock Mr Singh out there and then? You can clearly hear Mrs Singh say to Massimo Sica, are you going to protect me? you have my permission to be here, and so on and so forth. What about all the threats Mr Singh made to Massimo Sica like, you dont know what im capable of, just you wait youre gonna get it, you will see what i can do etc etc . There are police records (who were called to go there by both Massimo Sica and Mr Singh) indicating why Massimo Sica was there.
Massimo Sica has been accused of committing this horrible crime with not a scintilla of DNA evidence linking him to it, without a motive, and police had also targeted him as a prime suspect practically within the same day he discovered the bodies. Massimo Sica and his family have always fully co operated with authorities in each and every way and beyond.
Neelma Singh, Sidhi Singh and Kunal Singh deserve true justice, for what happened to them was atrocious. Massimo Sica is truly the forth victim in this tragedy and i only hope and pray that he and those three children will get true justice.
AMELIA BENTLEY
The lawyer for accused triple-murderer Max Sica has suggested hired assassins could have been behind the murders of the Singh siblings, who were found slain in their Brisbane home seven years ago.
Barrister Sam Di Carlo made the comment in the Queensland Court of Appeal yesterday, where he argued his client deserved bail as he awaits trial accused of the 2003 murders of his ex-girlfriend Neelma, 24, her brother Kunal and 12-year-old sister Sidhi Singh.
The father of three from Stafford Heights, has failed in two Supreme Court bids for freedom since his November 2008 arrest for the murders.
But his lawyers took the issue to the Court of Appeal, arguing the case against Sica was "extremely weak" and he should not be kept in prison awaiting a trial which may not happen until 2012.
Mr Di Carlo said there were several others who could have been responsible for the murders - including hired assassins engaged by the siblings' father, Vijay Singh.
"There's been an abundance of evidence pointing to Mr Singh ... the day before he goes overseas he just happens to buy a bottle of bleach," he said.
Bleach, the court was told, was used to clean up parts of the scene of the murders.
During two hours of submissions, Mr Di Carlo argued Supreme Court Justice James Douglas had been mistaken when he did not have proper regard to the strength of the crown case against Sica.
He also urged Court of Appeal judges to listen to the Triple-0 call Sica made after he discovered the Singh siblings' dead in a spa bath.
"It's incredible. Short of Edward Norton in Primal Fear [Sica] must be the best actor [if he's guilty of murdering Singhs]," he said.
But Crown prosecutor Brendan Campbell told the Court of Appeal while the case against Sica was a circumstantial one, Mr Di Carlo was mistaken about much of the evidence.
"It's an outrageous suggestion the father is responsible for killing his own children," he said.
Mr Campbell said the Singhs' killer had used a garden fork to injure the siblings and then put the tool back in its usual spot.
"If it was assassins, they have used a weapon from inside the house," he said.
He denied Mr Di Carlo's suggestion police had "tunnel vision" and had decided Mr Sica was the murderer.
"Every other lead that has been raised has been chased down and excluded," he said.
The Court of Appeal has reserved its decision in the matter.
("It's an outrageous suggestion the father is responsible for killing his own children," he said.)
This is a comment made by Mr Campbell for prosecution, well i say that it is even more outrageous to think that Massimo Sica had anything at all to do with the death of the woman that he loved and her sibblings whom he also considered as part of his family.
Massimo Sica has been portrayed as being violent and so forth when there is nothing indicating him to be that way inclined, infact far from it. He has made foolish mistakes in the past, which i might add did not have anything to do with being violent or threatening towards anyone in anyway at all, and he has paid very dearly for it. HOWEVER Mr V.J. Singh has been violent, threatening, abbusive and this is against his own family members. Like i have already stated in this blog, Massimo Sica was called to the Singh residence not only on the occassion where Mr Singh happened to record it, but on other occassions as well.
That recorded episode was completely twisted and made to look like Massimo Sica had gone there to threaten the Singh family. Massimo Sica was called there by Sidhi Singh (the youngest child) because she was afraid for her mothers safety. If Massimo Sica was so violent, so threatening, so psychotic, why did he not just knock Mr Singh out there and then? You can clearly hear Mrs Singh say to Massimo Sica, are you going to protect me? you have my permission to be here, and so on and so forth. What about all the threats Mr Singh made to Massimo Sica like, you dont know what im capable of, just you wait youre gonna get it, you will see what i can do etc etc . There are police records (who were called to go there by both Massimo Sica and Mr Singh) indicating why Massimo Sica was there.
Massimo Sica has been accused of committing this horrible crime with not a scintilla of DNA evidence linking him to it, without a motive, and police had also targeted him as a prime suspect practically within the same day he discovered the bodies. Massimo Sica and his family have always fully co operated with authorities in each and every way and beyond.
Neelma Singh, Sidhi Singh and Kunal Singh deserve true justice, for what happened to them was atrocious. Massimo Sica is truly the forth victim in this tragedy and i only hope and pray that he and those three children will get true justice.
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
WHERE IS THE JUSTICE?
Sica being 'blackmailed from jail cell'
CHRISTINE KELLETT January 19, 2010 - 3:51PM
Accused triple murderer Max Sica is being blackmailed from his Brisbane prison cell while lawyers squabble over the spoils of a court case which could seal his fate, his brother claims.
Claudio Sica says his 39-year-old sibling is suffering in the face of spiralling legal costs, a mountain of evidence and threats his defence team may throw in the towel mid-way through a crucial committal hearing.
Defence barrister Sam Di Carlo has been representing Sica pro bono since December 2008, and had been receiving some Legal Aid funding until the service turned off the taps in June last year.
--------------------------------------'I'll cut you up into pieces': Singh dadNeelma Singh in nude photo smearSica a prime suspect from day oneAccused killer found children's blood trailSingh murder case on hold until next yearJealous Sica assaulted murder victim: court'Sica requested family threesomes'-------------------------------------
Legal Aid Queensland has refused to release further funds unless Sica accepts representation of its choosing and yesterday, when a part-heard committal hearing was due to recommence, Mr Di Carlo announced to the Brisbane Magistrates Court he could no longer afford to continue without being paid.
The committal hearing will decide whether Sica will face trial over the April 2003 slaying of Brisbane's Singh children - one of the state's most heinous crimes.
Until then, the Stafford father-of-three remains in limbo, kept in prison after failing repeatedly to win provisional release on bail.
Claudio Sica said the family had been given no explanation as to why Legal Aid would no longer provide the previously-approved funds. Sica himself has previously refused Legal Aid representation on the grounds he does not trust its lawyers.
"It's just a nightmare to be honest. It has been a seven year nightmare up to now," Claudio Sica told Fairfax Radio 4BC today.
"The mind boggles at what you must feel when the whole weight of the state is against you.
"Unfortunately most people, unless you have come across the criminal code, do not realise exactly how helpless you are.
"In Max's case there are 36,000 pages of documents, over 300 video cassettes, something like 400 audio cassettes and then there is hundreds of DVDs."
Mr Sica said the evidence complied by police and the Director of Public Prosecutions - about 670 gigabytes in total - would take six months to read if Legal Aid succeeded in having the brief outsourced to another private legal firm.
"They gave us originally 105 gigs of data six months on and now at the last hour we've got 552 gigs of further material. I think that equates to something in excess of 100 encyclopedia Britannicas. That's absurd.
"Just to read the material alone, they have estimated [it would cost ] $300,000."
He said the family could not afford the $22,000 a day it would cost for private legal representation, leaving Sica with no other option but to defend himself.
"How can a defendant from jail, with no resources in jail at all, defend themselves?
"People don't realise the legal cost in Australia for a minor case exceeds $100,000 and in a case like this, to do it any justice, you need four to five million dollars.
"So far in Max's case we have had 16 people representing the state and you can imagine the back of house. We don't have access to that.
"It's easy for people say 'oh they're guilty they don't deserve anything' but you are innocent until proven guilty."
He said Mr Di Carlo had asked Legal Aid Queensland for about $100,000 yesterday, which he said was "probably a 10th of what it has cost the state."
The Sica family, including Max's wife Shivanjani, have staunchly defended him in public and have used several media appearances to protest his innocence.
In court, relatives have donned T-shirts with slogans and accusations of injustice.
Among their primary complaints is the length of time Sica has been held in prison amid ongoing delays.
In September, Magistrate Brian Hine agreed things were taking too long, but gave Sica an ultimatum yesterday to either accept a Legal Aid lawyer "or run the defence yourself."
"Even the DPP admitted at Max's last bail application, this could take another three years," Claudio Sica said.
"How do you compensate someone who has spent four years away from their family, their kids? Well, ask [former convicted killer] Graham Stafford.
"At the end of the day, you can't have someone languishing in jail, being virtually blackmailed into accepting a deal.
"Seven years is quite a long time."
- with Amelia Bentley
here is link to 4bc radio conversation with Claudio Sica Max Sica`s brother.
http://www.4bc.com.au/displayPopUpPlayerAction.action?&url=http://media.mytalk.com.au/4bc/podcasts/sicacase.mp3
22nd January newspaper article link
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/singh-house-reveals-its-bloody-secrets-20100122-mpk2.html
25th Januray newspaper article link
http://mybiz.optus.com.au/news/87605/police-thought-singhs-were-shot.html
CHRISTINE KELLETT January 19, 2010 - 3:51PM
Accused triple murderer Max Sica is being blackmailed from his Brisbane prison cell while lawyers squabble over the spoils of a court case which could seal his fate, his brother claims.
Claudio Sica says his 39-year-old sibling is suffering in the face of spiralling legal costs, a mountain of evidence and threats his defence team may throw in the towel mid-way through a crucial committal hearing.
Defence barrister Sam Di Carlo has been representing Sica pro bono since December 2008, and had been receiving some Legal Aid funding until the service turned off the taps in June last year.
--------------------------------------'I'll cut you up into pieces': Singh dadNeelma Singh in nude photo smearSica a prime suspect from day oneAccused killer found children's blood trailSingh murder case on hold until next yearJealous Sica assaulted murder victim: court'Sica requested family threesomes'-------------------------------------
Legal Aid Queensland has refused to release further funds unless Sica accepts representation of its choosing and yesterday, when a part-heard committal hearing was due to recommence, Mr Di Carlo announced to the Brisbane Magistrates Court he could no longer afford to continue without being paid.
The committal hearing will decide whether Sica will face trial over the April 2003 slaying of Brisbane's Singh children - one of the state's most heinous crimes.
Until then, the Stafford father-of-three remains in limbo, kept in prison after failing repeatedly to win provisional release on bail.
Claudio Sica said the family had been given no explanation as to why Legal Aid would no longer provide the previously-approved funds. Sica himself has previously refused Legal Aid representation on the grounds he does not trust its lawyers.
"It's just a nightmare to be honest. It has been a seven year nightmare up to now," Claudio Sica told Fairfax Radio 4BC today.
"The mind boggles at what you must feel when the whole weight of the state is against you.
"Unfortunately most people, unless you have come across the criminal code, do not realise exactly how helpless you are.
"In Max's case there are 36,000 pages of documents, over 300 video cassettes, something like 400 audio cassettes and then there is hundreds of DVDs."
Mr Sica said the evidence complied by police and the Director of Public Prosecutions - about 670 gigabytes in total - would take six months to read if Legal Aid succeeded in having the brief outsourced to another private legal firm.
"They gave us originally 105 gigs of data six months on and now at the last hour we've got 552 gigs of further material. I think that equates to something in excess of 100 encyclopedia Britannicas. That's absurd.
"Just to read the material alone, they have estimated [it would cost ] $300,000."
He said the family could not afford the $22,000 a day it would cost for private legal representation, leaving Sica with no other option but to defend himself.
"How can a defendant from jail, with no resources in jail at all, defend themselves?
"People don't realise the legal cost in Australia for a minor case exceeds $100,000 and in a case like this, to do it any justice, you need four to five million dollars.
"So far in Max's case we have had 16 people representing the state and you can imagine the back of house. We don't have access to that.
"It's easy for people say 'oh they're guilty they don't deserve anything' but you are innocent until proven guilty."
He said Mr Di Carlo had asked Legal Aid Queensland for about $100,000 yesterday, which he said was "probably a 10th of what it has cost the state."
The Sica family, including Max's wife Shivanjani, have staunchly defended him in public and have used several media appearances to protest his innocence.
In court, relatives have donned T-shirts with slogans and accusations of injustice.
Among their primary complaints is the length of time Sica has been held in prison amid ongoing delays.
In September, Magistrate Brian Hine agreed things were taking too long, but gave Sica an ultimatum yesterday to either accept a Legal Aid lawyer "or run the defence yourself."
"Even the DPP admitted at Max's last bail application, this could take another three years," Claudio Sica said.
"How do you compensate someone who has spent four years away from their family, their kids? Well, ask [former convicted killer] Graham Stafford.
"At the end of the day, you can't have someone languishing in jail, being virtually blackmailed into accepting a deal.
"Seven years is quite a long time."
- with Amelia Bentley
here is link to 4bc radio conversation with Claudio Sica Max Sica`s brother.
http://www.4bc.com.au/displayPopUpPlayerAction.action?&url=http://media.mytalk.com.au/4bc/podcasts/sicacase.mp3
22nd January newspaper article link
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/singh-house-reveals-its-bloody-secrets-20100122-mpk2.html
25th Januray newspaper article link
http://mybiz.optus.com.au/news/87605/police-thought-singhs-were-shot.html
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
PART OF COMMENT MADE (and who do you think would make this comment?)
The only way for Max to get away with this is to complain and find a loop hole in the legal system. It's clear you guys are after a 'multimillion dollar payout' already and are trying to leak evidence which hasn't been made public yet.
Above is part of a comment made to the post MAX DENIED BAIL YET AGAIN.
What i want to know is..... what is the evidence i am trying to leak that has not been made public yet? Could you please tell me because you must know something that i dont.
What information could we leak to the prospective jury? Information about the incompetent and bias investigation? The tunnel vision that enabled the real culprit/s to get away because they made up their mind who did it from day one and did not keep an open mind? Whose fingerprints were those around the bed head?, and why were Max’ prints not on the prayer document on the 20th? Don’t tell me he wiped that clean too.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/breaking-news/max-sica-prime-triple-murder-suspect-from-day-one/story-fn3dxiwe-1225787581640
Max Sica has been put in a remand centre since the 30th of December 2008. He has been charged with this horrendous crime without any evidence. He has been denied bail not because they have some sort of concrete evidence against him......but because of unfounded assumptions that he could be a flight risk, tamper with witnesses or reoffend.
Max Sica was charged nearly six years after the crimes were committed. He had ample time to "flee" if that`s what his intention was. But Max Sica has never fled anywhere and has always cooperated with police in every way. Max did not have a lawyer at the beginning because he knew he was innocent and had nothing to hide. This was a big mistake, at least with a lawyer you actually know where you stand and what rights you have.
Where is the assumption of innocence? Max Sica was targeted as the prime suspect not even 24hrs after discovering the bodies. Then one is right to think that you are guilty unless proven innocent. Media coverage on Max Sica since the day of him discovering the bodies has been relentless. He was not charged with the crime then, but still he was continuously in the papers.... even for a traffic offence.
Max Sica should not spend one more day in a cell. Not because i know he is innocent, but because what is happening to him is a true injustice on a massive scale.
oh and to you annonymous one who made that comment and more, why dont you attach a name to it? and by the way you are wrong, info provided has all been already stated. But please feel free to enlighten me whenever you wish.
Above is part of a comment made to the post MAX DENIED BAIL YET AGAIN.
What i want to know is..... what is the evidence i am trying to leak that has not been made public yet? Could you please tell me because you must know something that i dont.
What information could we leak to the prospective jury? Information about the incompetent and bias investigation? The tunnel vision that enabled the real culprit/s to get away because they made up their mind who did it from day one and did not keep an open mind? Whose fingerprints were those around the bed head?, and why were Max’ prints not on the prayer document on the 20th? Don’t tell me he wiped that clean too.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/breaking-news/max-sica-prime-triple-murder-suspect-from-day-one/story-fn3dxiwe-1225787581640
Max Sica has been put in a remand centre since the 30th of December 2008. He has been charged with this horrendous crime without any evidence. He has been denied bail not because they have some sort of concrete evidence against him......but because of unfounded assumptions that he could be a flight risk, tamper with witnesses or reoffend.
Max Sica was charged nearly six years after the crimes were committed. He had ample time to "flee" if that`s what his intention was. But Max Sica has never fled anywhere and has always cooperated with police in every way. Max did not have a lawyer at the beginning because he knew he was innocent and had nothing to hide. This was a big mistake, at least with a lawyer you actually know where you stand and what rights you have.
Where is the assumption of innocence? Max Sica was targeted as the prime suspect not even 24hrs after discovering the bodies. Then one is right to think that you are guilty unless proven innocent. Media coverage on Max Sica since the day of him discovering the bodies has been relentless. He was not charged with the crime then, but still he was continuously in the papers.... even for a traffic offence.
Max Sica should not spend one more day in a cell. Not because i know he is innocent, but because what is happening to him is a true injustice on a massive scale.
oh and to you annonymous one who made that comment and more, why dont you attach a name to it? and by the way you are wrong, info provided has all been already stated. But please feel free to enlighten me whenever you wish.
Monday, December 14, 2009
MAX SICA DENIED BAIL YET AGAIN
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/singh-dad-had-motive-in-childrens-murders-court-20091214-kr2z.html
Today Max Sica was once again unjustly denied bail. The Judge who was originally appointed for the bail hearing was changed at the last moment and Judge Douglas (who volunteered his services) was once again the bail Judge for Max Sica. Once again Max was denied bail because of unfounded assumptions of him fleeing, reoffending or tampering with witnesses. What i heard in court today had nothing to do with the actual murder case, but all to do with Max Sica`s past and an arson attack (on police station) which was committed many years ago. Max Sica has done more than his fair share of time in jail for charges laid against him in 1990.
If Max Sica wanted to flee, he would have. Max Sica was a completely free man in 2006 and could have even travelled overseas if he chose to. When Max Sica was to be married, (December 2008) he actually asked the priest if it could be done as soon as possible because he knew that he was going to be arrested. If he had any intention to flee, why didnt he?
Max Sica has been under close police surveillance practically since the murders occured in April 2003. The house where he lived with his parents was bugged, he was followed and observed by police constantly and other tactics by police were used to further their investigation and try to obtain any other information. (like using undercover officers to befriend Max Sica and try to get any evidence against him. which they did without any outcome)
Max Sica has never interfered with police investigations and has always been fully cooperative with them. He has never been violent towards anyone or threatened anyone in anyway.
Even the states own forensic experts have stated that there is not one scintilla of evidence against Max Sica. No DNA no fingerprints and no transference between Max Sica, the murder weapon and the Singh children. All the scientists agree about the transference theory which states that when two objects come into close proximity of eachother, mollecules would bind from the two objects. When the states forensic expert was asked if this was the case for Sica, he stated there was nothing on Max Sica`s person, clothes, shoes, motorvehicles or Sica`s home, not even a microdot of evidence.
Common sense would prevail that not one person alone could have killed the Singh children and that in the brutal way that they were murdered, would leave DNA and blood spatter on the person/s who had killed them.
We believe that Mr Singh was under federal investigation prior to the murders, why are there no documents to at least state why was this done and what was the outcome?
Max Sica has been made out to be some kind of violent murdering monster with nothing in his background to make one believe so. In court at the committal hearing, there has been a lot said about violence, beatings, sordid sex lives etc etc which had nothing at all to do with Max Sica.
There were at least 6 fingerprints found around one of the victims heads which did not belong to Max Sica and only one of these prints was sent overseas to Fiji because police said they did not have the funding. More than 52 unidentifed prints were found at the Singh residence.
Justice Douglas again denied Sica bail because he said that there was no material change in his circumstances that warranted his release. Which material changes did he want? The case is a very weak one even he admitted this. It was also said that there were at least another 6 persons who could have committed the crime even more so than Max Sica and that police did not really investigate it to the full. It was also heard in court today that there was a statement made by Mrs Singh to the police that she blamed her husband for the death of their children.
Judge Douglas even agreeing to certain things still refused bail for Max Sica mostly because of assumptions of him being a flight risk, of reoffending or of tampering with witnesses, or worse still some corruption at a judicial level.
We have 100% proof of this occurring already at a magistrate level with a female magistrate which did not uphold the law. Judges are not meant to make popular decisions but they have a duty to uphold to the letter of the law and not just be a puppet of the state (which is occurring at this time in QLD and has been for at least a couple of decades).
Should Queensland`s bail system change to a more common sense approach..... the Judge presiding at the committal hearings should also be appointed to the bail hearings, for only he is in the position to know the strengths or weaknesses of a case. (especially on a case of this magnitude)
This is a great miscarriage of Justice and the QLD criminal justice system needs to have an overall cleaning and change of their current system.
Max Sica has delcared his innocence from the very beginning but he was already targeted as a prime suspect within not even 24 hrs of discovering the bodies.
Max Sica was always there when the family was in trouble because he was called to be there and helped them in anyway, especially because of the violence Mr Singh infilicted on his family.
In most murder cases there is somehow a strong motive as to why one would do such a thing, in Max Sica`s case there is no motive whatsoever.
In the last five days prior to the murders, police own records indicate that Max Sica and Neelma Singh were getting along very very very well.
I hope the state government shows the same stamina and vigour to pay a multimillion dollar compensation claim to Mr Sica and his family for the nearly seven years of persecution. Also ask yourselves..... why has Det. zitny not been charged with perjury when it clearly came out in court recently he perjured himself? The best advice that we have within the government so far, tells us that he has not been charged because it would open a floodgate of convicted people to ask to be retried and this would cost the state millions. BUT what price do we place on justice? The state must bear the cost once it employs a corrupt force just like anyother company would be liable for their employees actions.
Today Max Sica was once again unjustly denied bail. The Judge who was originally appointed for the bail hearing was changed at the last moment and Judge Douglas (who volunteered his services) was once again the bail Judge for Max Sica. Once again Max was denied bail because of unfounded assumptions of him fleeing, reoffending or tampering with witnesses. What i heard in court today had nothing to do with the actual murder case, but all to do with Max Sica`s past and an arson attack (on police station) which was committed many years ago. Max Sica has done more than his fair share of time in jail for charges laid against him in 1990.
If Max Sica wanted to flee, he would have. Max Sica was a completely free man in 2006 and could have even travelled overseas if he chose to. When Max Sica was to be married, (December 2008) he actually asked the priest if it could be done as soon as possible because he knew that he was going to be arrested. If he had any intention to flee, why didnt he?
Max Sica has been under close police surveillance practically since the murders occured in April 2003. The house where he lived with his parents was bugged, he was followed and observed by police constantly and other tactics by police were used to further their investigation and try to obtain any other information. (like using undercover officers to befriend Max Sica and try to get any evidence against him. which they did without any outcome)
Max Sica has never interfered with police investigations and has always been fully cooperative with them. He has never been violent towards anyone or threatened anyone in anyway.
Even the states own forensic experts have stated that there is not one scintilla of evidence against Max Sica. No DNA no fingerprints and no transference between Max Sica, the murder weapon and the Singh children. All the scientists agree about the transference theory which states that when two objects come into close proximity of eachother, mollecules would bind from the two objects. When the states forensic expert was asked if this was the case for Sica, he stated there was nothing on Max Sica`s person, clothes, shoes, motorvehicles or Sica`s home, not even a microdot of evidence.
Common sense would prevail that not one person alone could have killed the Singh children and that in the brutal way that they were murdered, would leave DNA and blood spatter on the person/s who had killed them.
We believe that Mr Singh was under federal investigation prior to the murders, why are there no documents to at least state why was this done and what was the outcome?
Max Sica has been made out to be some kind of violent murdering monster with nothing in his background to make one believe so. In court at the committal hearing, there has been a lot said about violence, beatings, sordid sex lives etc etc which had nothing at all to do with Max Sica.
There were at least 6 fingerprints found around one of the victims heads which did not belong to Max Sica and only one of these prints was sent overseas to Fiji because police said they did not have the funding. More than 52 unidentifed prints were found at the Singh residence.
Justice Douglas again denied Sica bail because he said that there was no material change in his circumstances that warranted his release. Which material changes did he want? The case is a very weak one even he admitted this. It was also said that there were at least another 6 persons who could have committed the crime even more so than Max Sica and that police did not really investigate it to the full. It was also heard in court today that there was a statement made by Mrs Singh to the police that she blamed her husband for the death of their children.
Judge Douglas even agreeing to certain things still refused bail for Max Sica mostly because of assumptions of him being a flight risk, of reoffending or of tampering with witnesses, or worse still some corruption at a judicial level.
We have 100% proof of this occurring already at a magistrate level with a female magistrate which did not uphold the law. Judges are not meant to make popular decisions but they have a duty to uphold to the letter of the law and not just be a puppet of the state (which is occurring at this time in QLD and has been for at least a couple of decades).
Should Queensland`s bail system change to a more common sense approach..... the Judge presiding at the committal hearings should also be appointed to the bail hearings, for only he is in the position to know the strengths or weaknesses of a case. (especially on a case of this magnitude)
This is a great miscarriage of Justice and the QLD criminal justice system needs to have an overall cleaning and change of their current system.
Max Sica has delcared his innocence from the very beginning but he was already targeted as a prime suspect within not even 24 hrs of discovering the bodies.
Max Sica was always there when the family was in trouble because he was called to be there and helped them in anyway, especially because of the violence Mr Singh infilicted on his family.
In most murder cases there is somehow a strong motive as to why one would do such a thing, in Max Sica`s case there is no motive whatsoever.
In the last five days prior to the murders, police own records indicate that Max Sica and Neelma Singh were getting along very very very well.
I hope the state government shows the same stamina and vigour to pay a multimillion dollar compensation claim to Mr Sica and his family for the nearly seven years of persecution. Also ask yourselves..... why has Det. zitny not been charged with perjury when it clearly came out in court recently he perjured himself? The best advice that we have within the government so far, tells us that he has not been charged because it would open a floodgate of convicted people to ask to be retried and this would cost the state millions. BUT what price do we place on justice? The state must bear the cost once it employs a corrupt force just like anyother company would be liable for their employees actions.
Friday, October 16, 2009
Max Sica was only prime suspect after triple slayings
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,26217815-3102,00.html
ACCUSED triple murderer Massimo "Max" Sica was the only "prime suspect" under investigation for the brutal slayings of Brisbane's Singh siblings within "24 hours" of their bodies being discovered in April 2003, a court has been told.The Brisbane Magistrates Court was today told Sica was the only person police targeted for investigation over the slaying of Sica's former girlfriend Neelma Singh, 24, her brother Kunal, 18, and sister Sidhi, 12, at the home they shared with their parents at Bridgeman Downs, in Brisbane's north, in April 2003. The comment came as Sica's barrister, Sam Di Carlo, requested the full brief of police evidence more than 6 1/2 years after the Singh siblings were allegedly murdered and dumped in the heated spa bath of their family home. Last week, Queensland's deputy chief magistrate Brian Hine warned police he would consider freeing the man accused of the triple slaying of Brisbane's Singh siblings if they continued to hold up his committal hearing. Mr Hine said he would consider any application to stay charges against Sica if police did not supply defence lawyers with all the evidence required before the hearing resumes in January. He also ordered Detective Senior Sergeant Joseph Zitny to return to the witness box on November 16 to explain delays in supplying Sica's lawyers with all of the prosecution's evidence. Mr Zitney was in court today, but not required to testify after prosecutor Brendan Campbell indicated all of the police brief, compiled so far, had been handed to Sica's lawyers. Mr Di Carlo accepted the Crown had given him documents he requested. Police have spent the past 6 1/2 years investigating the deaths. They were killed while their parents, Shirley and Vijay, were in Fiji on business. Solicitor Kerry Smith-Douglas, for Sica, last week told the Brisbane Magistrates Court her client continued to languish in prison despite his ongoing strenuous denial of having any involvement in the triple slaying of the Singh siblings. Sica's barrister, Sam Di Carlo, last month consistently complained during the committal hearing about receiving an endless deluge of crucial documents and witness statements from police, leaving him inadequate time to prepare his client's defence. He said he had endeavoured to whittle down a list of almost 250 witnesses required for cross-examination but it was "entirely inappropriate'' for the defence team to be receiving crucial documents more than six years after the murders. Mr Hine said yesterday: "I'll consider staying the matter and releasing the defendant if police continue to hold things up.'' Mr Hine has already heard five weeks of evidence after Sica's committal hearing began on August 13. Witnesses who have already testified include the parents of the trio and their only surviving older sibling Archanna Pathik. Vijay Singh, under defence cross-examination, admitted to having extra-marital affairs and regularly beating his wife. But he denied any involvement in his children's deaths or framing Sica for the crime. Mr Di Carlo did not apply for Sica to be granted bail. Sica was remanded in custody for committal on the murder charges on January 28. Sica, who appeared for today's brief hearing, chatted openly with his new wife and father.
DOES NOT TAKE A GENIUS TO WORK IT OUT, MAX HAS AND IS BEING RAILROADED.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,26218016-26103,00.html
MAX Sica was the prime suspect in the Singh triple slaying from day one, despite a lead detective swearing under oath he was initially just a person of interest, a Brisbane court has heard.
Mr Sica, 39, of Stafford, is charged with the murders of former girlfriend Neelma Singh, 24, and her siblings Kunal, 18 and Sidhi, 12.
The trio was found dead in the spa of the family home in the outer Brisbane suburb of Bridgeman Downs in the early hours of April 22, 2003.
During a mention in the Brisbane Magistrates Court today, defence barrister Sam Di Carlo said he had obtained a police document that referred to Mr Sica as the "prime suspect" on April 22, 2003, less than 24 hours after the investigation began.
He said this contradicted evidence given by one of the lead detectives on the case, Detective Senior Sergeant Joseph Zitny, who swore under oath during the currently adjourned committal hearing that Mr Sica was only ever a "person of interest" at the beginning of the investigation.
Mr Di Carlo said targeting Mr Sica as the prime suspect before the investigation properly got under way prevented detectives from thoroughly looking into other avenues and perhaps created a miscarriage of justice.
"Max Sica was a prime suspect within 24 hours of the investigation beginning," Mr Di Carlo said.
"The detectives spent the next few years trying to prove it was Mr Sica and this prevented them from searching down other burrows and investigating other people that it may have been."
Outside the court, Mr Sica's father Carlos Sica said authorities had "gone for the throat" of his son since day one.
"Now we have the evidence to prove it, that this police document said he was the prime suspect," he said.
The matter has been adjourned for a mention on November 16.
ACCUSED triple murderer Massimo "Max" Sica was the only "prime suspect" under investigation for the brutal slayings of Brisbane's Singh siblings within "24 hours" of their bodies being discovered in April 2003, a court has been told.The Brisbane Magistrates Court was today told Sica was the only person police targeted for investigation over the slaying of Sica's former girlfriend Neelma Singh, 24, her brother Kunal, 18, and sister Sidhi, 12, at the home they shared with their parents at Bridgeman Downs, in Brisbane's north, in April 2003. The comment came as Sica's barrister, Sam Di Carlo, requested the full brief of police evidence more than 6 1/2 years after the Singh siblings were allegedly murdered and dumped in the heated spa bath of their family home. Last week, Queensland's deputy chief magistrate Brian Hine warned police he would consider freeing the man accused of the triple slaying of Brisbane's Singh siblings if they continued to hold up his committal hearing. Mr Hine said he would consider any application to stay charges against Sica if police did not supply defence lawyers with all the evidence required before the hearing resumes in January. He also ordered Detective Senior Sergeant Joseph Zitny to return to the witness box on November 16 to explain delays in supplying Sica's lawyers with all of the prosecution's evidence. Mr Zitney was in court today, but not required to testify after prosecutor Brendan Campbell indicated all of the police brief, compiled so far, had been handed to Sica's lawyers. Mr Di Carlo accepted the Crown had given him documents he requested. Police have spent the past 6 1/2 years investigating the deaths. They were killed while their parents, Shirley and Vijay, were in Fiji on business. Solicitor Kerry Smith-Douglas, for Sica, last week told the Brisbane Magistrates Court her client continued to languish in prison despite his ongoing strenuous denial of having any involvement in the triple slaying of the Singh siblings. Sica's barrister, Sam Di Carlo, last month consistently complained during the committal hearing about receiving an endless deluge of crucial documents and witness statements from police, leaving him inadequate time to prepare his client's defence. He said he had endeavoured to whittle down a list of almost 250 witnesses required for cross-examination but it was "entirely inappropriate'' for the defence team to be receiving crucial documents more than six years after the murders. Mr Hine said yesterday: "I'll consider staying the matter and releasing the defendant if police continue to hold things up.'' Mr Hine has already heard five weeks of evidence after Sica's committal hearing began on August 13. Witnesses who have already testified include the parents of the trio and their only surviving older sibling Archanna Pathik. Vijay Singh, under defence cross-examination, admitted to having extra-marital affairs and regularly beating his wife. But he denied any involvement in his children's deaths or framing Sica for the crime. Mr Di Carlo did not apply for Sica to be granted bail. Sica was remanded in custody for committal on the murder charges on January 28. Sica, who appeared for today's brief hearing, chatted openly with his new wife and father.
DOES NOT TAKE A GENIUS TO WORK IT OUT, MAX HAS AND IS BEING RAILROADED.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,26218016-26103,00.html
MAX Sica was the prime suspect in the Singh triple slaying from day one, despite a lead detective swearing under oath he was initially just a person of interest, a Brisbane court has heard.
Mr Sica, 39, of Stafford, is charged with the murders of former girlfriend Neelma Singh, 24, and her siblings Kunal, 18 and Sidhi, 12.
The trio was found dead in the spa of the family home in the outer Brisbane suburb of Bridgeman Downs in the early hours of April 22, 2003.
During a mention in the Brisbane Magistrates Court today, defence barrister Sam Di Carlo said he had obtained a police document that referred to Mr Sica as the "prime suspect" on April 22, 2003, less than 24 hours after the investigation began.
He said this contradicted evidence given by one of the lead detectives on the case, Detective Senior Sergeant Joseph Zitny, who swore under oath during the currently adjourned committal hearing that Mr Sica was only ever a "person of interest" at the beginning of the investigation.
Mr Di Carlo said targeting Mr Sica as the prime suspect before the investigation properly got under way prevented detectives from thoroughly looking into other avenues and perhaps created a miscarriage of justice.
"Max Sica was a prime suspect within 24 hours of the investigation beginning," Mr Di Carlo said.
"The detectives spent the next few years trying to prove it was Mr Sica and this prevented them from searching down other burrows and investigating other people that it may have been."
Outside the court, Mr Sica's father Carlos Sica said authorities had "gone for the throat" of his son since day one.
"Now we have the evidence to prove it, that this police document said he was the prime suspect," he said.
The matter has been adjourned for a mention on November 16.
Friday, October 9, 2009
Singh murder accused Max Sica may be set free over police delays
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,26186383-3102,00.html
link to newspaper article
The truth cannot be denied for much longer, police are holding things up because they have absolutely nothing. WHY? Because he did not do it. Police are trying to fit a square peg into a round hole (as so to suit what they want to) Max Sica is innocent and should not be kept in confinement for another second.
link to newspaper article
The truth cannot be denied for much longer, police are holding things up because they have absolutely nothing. WHY? Because he did not do it. Police are trying to fit a square peg into a round hole (as so to suit what they want to) Max Sica is innocent and should not be kept in confinement for another second.
Friday, September 18, 2009
FINGERPRINT EXPERT
Six of the unidentified fingerprints were found at the crime scene (specifically on Neelma Singh`s bedhead and Kunal Singh`s room)and police did not send the fingerprints to be searched in a worldwide database. The fingerprint expert was told by police that it would be too expensive to do so, so they only sent one fingerprint to Fiji to be checked. The fingerprint expert also admitted that by 7.30am on Wednesday 23rd of April 2003 (morning after bodies of Singh children were discovered) two officers had told him that they had already made up their minds and that Max Sica was their prime suspect.
Is this how the justice system works? In a case of this magnitude they look at cutting costs and they dont investigate all the avenues given to them? How much did they spend on getting footprint expert Robert Kennedy from Canada out here?
Is this a true case of tunnel vision from the start? To me it looks like Max Sica is being railroaded. I ask again, WHERE IS THE JUSTICE?
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/sica-committal-trial-on-hold-until-next-year-20090919-fvn2.html
SINGH PRIVATE LIVES EXPOSED http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,27574,26092965-3102,00.html
Shirley Singh said on the stand that she was the one who willingly gave information about her past.(sordid sex life, violence in the family, death threats from a number of people etc etc) HOWEVER, she did not do this until about a couple of months after the murders. Numerous amounts of information had already been recieved in relation to all the family affairs by both relatives, people from the public, (including clients of Mrs Singh to whom she had offered sexual favours)annonymous callers, friends of the Singh children etc. People from the public also informed the police about the eldest daughter Sonia Pathik who also led a sordid sex life. The majority of the people who informed police, gave their names, and statements were obtained from them.(hence the 600 or so witnesses) A recording of all the phone messages was seized by the police and thats how they found out about the death threats to Mr Singh and his family. They also seized tape and video recordings (which also contained the sex videos made by Vijay Singh with his wife Shirley and other people male and female and couples) from the Singh family immediately after the discovery of the murders. Max Sica was also aware of the family affairs and logically this was known to the Singh`s. So really Mrs Singh did not tell police anything out of her own accord, the police were already well aware of the family`s dealings. Max Sica`s first police interview was on the same day he discovered the bodies, police already knew some information about the family`s dealings from him then. Shortly after they knew from other people including relatives and authorities. Naturally after police knowing all this, she had to tell them. She herself knew of the many people (including Max Sica) who knew bits and pieces of the family`s affairs.
It has been said by Mrs Singh that max had attacked Neelma and tried to choke her on her bed, not because she saw this, but she alleged Neelma had told her this. The only person who has truly caused bodily harm to Neelma has been her own father (especially on one occassion when he faced a court of law over hitting her with closed fists and broke a cue stick on her) and for what? For talking to a boy on the phone.
The Singh`s have said a lot about what Neelma Singh said and felt towards Max Sica, Neelma Singh is unfortunately, not here to say otherwise.
What would have happened if the public had heard of Mr Singh`s violence towards his wife and kids, about his numerous marital affairs, about him forcing his wife to have sex with other men and women, about allegations of sexual abuse, about death threats he had been recieving because of his own actions etc etc etc. Now imagine if he was the main suspect, would learning this information make him automatically guilty of murdering his children? Asking whats my point? My point is that just because Mr Singh might have made some bad choices or decisions (in other peoples aspects), still does not make him a murderer. Yes..........Max Sica has got a criminal record, he is not a murderer.
Is this how the justice system works? In a case of this magnitude they look at cutting costs and they dont investigate all the avenues given to them? How much did they spend on getting footprint expert Robert Kennedy from Canada out here?
Is this a true case of tunnel vision from the start? To me it looks like Max Sica is being railroaded. I ask again, WHERE IS THE JUSTICE?
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/sica-committal-trial-on-hold-until-next-year-20090919-fvn2.html
SINGH PRIVATE LIVES EXPOSED http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,27574,26092965-3102,00.html
Shirley Singh said on the stand that she was the one who willingly gave information about her past.(sordid sex life, violence in the family, death threats from a number of people etc etc) HOWEVER, she did not do this until about a couple of months after the murders. Numerous amounts of information had already been recieved in relation to all the family affairs by both relatives, people from the public, (including clients of Mrs Singh to whom she had offered sexual favours)annonymous callers, friends of the Singh children etc. People from the public also informed the police about the eldest daughter Sonia Pathik who also led a sordid sex life. The majority of the people who informed police, gave their names, and statements were obtained from them.(hence the 600 or so witnesses) A recording of all the phone messages was seized by the police and thats how they found out about the death threats to Mr Singh and his family. They also seized tape and video recordings (which also contained the sex videos made by Vijay Singh with his wife Shirley and other people male and female and couples) from the Singh family immediately after the discovery of the murders. Max Sica was also aware of the family affairs and logically this was known to the Singh`s. So really Mrs Singh did not tell police anything out of her own accord, the police were already well aware of the family`s dealings. Max Sica`s first police interview was on the same day he discovered the bodies, police already knew some information about the family`s dealings from him then. Shortly after they knew from other people including relatives and authorities. Naturally after police knowing all this, she had to tell them. She herself knew of the many people (including Max Sica) who knew bits and pieces of the family`s affairs.
It has been said by Mrs Singh that max had attacked Neelma and tried to choke her on her bed, not because she saw this, but she alleged Neelma had told her this. The only person who has truly caused bodily harm to Neelma has been her own father (especially on one occassion when he faced a court of law over hitting her with closed fists and broke a cue stick on her) and for what? For talking to a boy on the phone.
The Singh`s have said a lot about what Neelma Singh said and felt towards Max Sica, Neelma Singh is unfortunately, not here to say otherwise.
What would have happened if the public had heard of Mr Singh`s violence towards his wife and kids, about his numerous marital affairs, about him forcing his wife to have sex with other men and women, about allegations of sexual abuse, about death threats he had been recieving because of his own actions etc etc etc. Now imagine if he was the main suspect, would learning this information make him automatically guilty of murdering his children? Asking whats my point? My point is that just because Mr Singh might have made some bad choices or decisions (in other peoples aspects), still does not make him a murderer. Yes..........Max Sica has got a criminal record, he is not a murderer.
Thursday, September 17, 2009
MAN SEEN JUMPING FENCE
Ms Foster (woman who had heard blood curdling screams coming from Singh house area at around 8.30pm on Easter Monday night 2003) had gone for her usual walk with then neighbour Olive at around 5.30am on Tuesday the 22nd of April 2003 (day Singh children bodies found) and had seen a man approaching them, all of a sudden this man ran the other way towards the Singh house and jumped a neighbours fence. Ms Foster had given an indenticate photo of this man who she says was between 40 to 50 years old, thin build and baldish. This was given to police days after murders occurred.
I ask only this, why was the indenticate photo of this man not ever published in any newspaper or put on any t.v. news program? Was this not a very crutial lead? Who was this man? Why was he around the Singh house area that early in the morning and particularly on that day? Why did this man run and jump a fence when he spotted the two women coming towards him? Why did this man not come forward and say who he was if he had nothing to be afraid of? It really is unbelievable that practically nothing was done about it.
Mr Paul Sarri who has stated seeing Sidhi Singh on Easter Monday morning, also said that when he gave his statement to police, they kept on telling him that he must be mistaken, that it must have been on another day. Mr Sarri was adamant he had seen her then.
Another man had initally stated he had seen Neelma Singh arrive at her house in her silver car on the Easter Monday morning, he had noticed this because he said that her car was the same as his friends car, only that his friends car was red. He said he had been working at the area for about seven days. He had given his statement to police the following day after the bodies were discovered (Wednesday 23rd April 2003) A week later he said he had made an error and changed his statement, he said it was not the Easter Monday but the week prior. When he gave his evidence in court, he was visibly shaking and seemed somewhat disoriented. About five to ten minutes into questioning, defence barrister Di Carlo and Magistrate Brian Hine asked if he needed a break, he said he did. To me this mans behaviour seemed somewhat strange, but then again it might have been only my impression.
Too many unanswered questions and a lot of things popping up that were not mentioned from the start. Why? Makes one think and wonder.
Max Sica lawyer bid to delay hearing until 2010
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,26087755-3102,00.html
As far as i know, it was the prosecution who had initially asked for and adjournment because the court space was needed. But at this point and looking at how this committal is progressing, an adjournment is unavoidable because of witheld material. Police are still after six years giving new crucial material to defence. Truly inappropriate when in the pursuit of JUSTICE, not only for the Singh`s, but also for Max Sica himself. You would think that after a period of over six years, the police would have had ample time to have ALL material for the defence, unbelievably not even the head of the investigation then (Brian Paton who retired 2-3 years after murders occurred) has yet to give his statement. The defence is expected to instead recieve crucial documentation on the spot and deal with it then and there.
Max Sica is the one who is recieving further injustice from all of this because he is the one still being kept in confinement.
I ask only this, why was the indenticate photo of this man not ever published in any newspaper or put on any t.v. news program? Was this not a very crutial lead? Who was this man? Why was he around the Singh house area that early in the morning and particularly on that day? Why did this man run and jump a fence when he spotted the two women coming towards him? Why did this man not come forward and say who he was if he had nothing to be afraid of? It really is unbelievable that practically nothing was done about it.
Mr Paul Sarri who has stated seeing Sidhi Singh on Easter Monday morning, also said that when he gave his statement to police, they kept on telling him that he must be mistaken, that it must have been on another day. Mr Sarri was adamant he had seen her then.
Another man had initally stated he had seen Neelma Singh arrive at her house in her silver car on the Easter Monday morning, he had noticed this because he said that her car was the same as his friends car, only that his friends car was red. He said he had been working at the area for about seven days. He had given his statement to police the following day after the bodies were discovered (Wednesday 23rd April 2003) A week later he said he had made an error and changed his statement, he said it was not the Easter Monday but the week prior. When he gave his evidence in court, he was visibly shaking and seemed somewhat disoriented. About five to ten minutes into questioning, defence barrister Di Carlo and Magistrate Brian Hine asked if he needed a break, he said he did. To me this mans behaviour seemed somewhat strange, but then again it might have been only my impression.
Too many unanswered questions and a lot of things popping up that were not mentioned from the start. Why? Makes one think and wonder.
Max Sica lawyer bid to delay hearing until 2010
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,26087755-3102,00.html
As far as i know, it was the prosecution who had initially asked for and adjournment because the court space was needed. But at this point and looking at how this committal is progressing, an adjournment is unavoidable because of witheld material. Police are still after six years giving new crucial material to defence. Truly inappropriate when in the pursuit of JUSTICE, not only for the Singh`s, but also for Max Sica himself. You would think that after a period of over six years, the police would have had ample time to have ALL material for the defence, unbelievably not even the head of the investigation then (Brian Paton who retired 2-3 years after murders occurred) has yet to give his statement. The defence is expected to instead recieve crucial documentation on the spot and deal with it then and there.
Max Sica is the one who is recieving further injustice from all of this because he is the one still being kept in confinement.
Monday, September 14, 2009
COMMENT MADE (put as a post truly informational)
4 me 2 know n u 2 find out said...
i was at the court today again for another case and while there, decided to go and sit in for a while at the sica hearing. there were a couple of neighbours (who lived behind the singhs house) who volunteered some information to the police on 23/04/03. jeffery spencer bliss and his partner, kim foster were entertaining guests on the rear deck of their house from where they had a direct view of the singh house and around 8.30pm heard what appeared to be a "blood curdling" female scream (as described by kim foster) followed by three loud cracks which they all described as being similar to gunshots, but not actually "gunshots." they all commented on it and expected to hear the sounds of a police and/or ambulance siren. as they looked towards the singhs house, they noticed that the lights were on. they described it as coming from the direction of the singh house.early the next morning, ms foster went for her usual walk with her then next door neighbour olive around 5.30am and saw a male who appeared to be approaching them, but then ran up the hill towards the singh residence and jumped over the neighbours fence.ms foster was able to provide an identicate photo of the man, who she described as being in his 40's to 50's. she described him as baldish and of a thin built. its amazing as so far there has seemed to be a number of people who have heard screams and seen the light on at the singh residence on the monday night, yet the police keep insisting and has led the public to believe that the murders occurred on the sunday night(11pm)and the early hours on monday morning(9am), however majority of the evidence has pointed to the monday night. i wonder why they are doing this, maybe perhaps sunday suits them better. something very fishy is going on, and if anyone that has followed this case closely will smell a rat a mile away. what people from the public have to remember is that "he said" "she said" is all hearsay in a court of law, especially in a case where the victims are deceased. the actual evidence is what counts, especially if it comes from people who neither knew the singh or the sica family.i also came to learn today that the primary detective who was in charge of the entire investigation and overlooked it (mr byron paton who retired from the police force about 2 to 3 years later) still hasnt provided a statement yet. apparently all detective zitny(the person who took over as head) had to say was that they are in the process of obtaining it. i mean come on seriously, use ur commonsense, that is one of the first things the police should have done and not five weeks into the commital which is set to finish this week, but the way things have gone, seems like more time will have to be assigned to mr sica's commital hearing which may get adjourned to continue later because of the police not providing all the material to the defense, and only providing what seems fit to them to implicate mr sica for the murders. i also found out that the dpp was unable to answer a simple question as to if any type of scientific examination took place in regards to the tyre tread patterns found in the area and if not, why not. mr zitny also said on the stand that an identicate photo had never been prepared, yet today one seems to have been provided to the defence barrister. for the sake of the singhs and sicas, i hope and pray that gods justice takes place and not that of men, as we all know that men are just vessels.
ARTICLE IN COURIER MAIL 15TH SEPTEMBER "MAX SICA NOT GETTING JUSTICE"
HERE IS LINK http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,,26072074-3102,00.htmlHonestly over 6 years and still when is the injustice going to end?
i was at the court today again for another case and while there, decided to go and sit in for a while at the sica hearing. there were a couple of neighbours (who lived behind the singhs house) who volunteered some information to the police on 23/04/03. jeffery spencer bliss and his partner, kim foster were entertaining guests on the rear deck of their house from where they had a direct view of the singh house and around 8.30pm heard what appeared to be a "blood curdling" female scream (as described by kim foster) followed by three loud cracks which they all described as being similar to gunshots, but not actually "gunshots." they all commented on it and expected to hear the sounds of a police and/or ambulance siren. as they looked towards the singhs house, they noticed that the lights were on. they described it as coming from the direction of the singh house.early the next morning, ms foster went for her usual walk with her then next door neighbour olive around 5.30am and saw a male who appeared to be approaching them, but then ran up the hill towards the singh residence and jumped over the neighbours fence.ms foster was able to provide an identicate photo of the man, who she described as being in his 40's to 50's. she described him as baldish and of a thin built. its amazing as so far there has seemed to be a number of people who have heard screams and seen the light on at the singh residence on the monday night, yet the police keep insisting and has led the public to believe that the murders occurred on the sunday night(11pm)and the early hours on monday morning(9am), however majority of the evidence has pointed to the monday night. i wonder why they are doing this, maybe perhaps sunday suits them better. something very fishy is going on, and if anyone that has followed this case closely will smell a rat a mile away. what people from the public have to remember is that "he said" "she said" is all hearsay in a court of law, especially in a case where the victims are deceased. the actual evidence is what counts, especially if it comes from people who neither knew the singh or the sica family.i also came to learn today that the primary detective who was in charge of the entire investigation and overlooked it (mr byron paton who retired from the police force about 2 to 3 years later) still hasnt provided a statement yet. apparently all detective zitny(the person who took over as head) had to say was that they are in the process of obtaining it. i mean come on seriously, use ur commonsense, that is one of the first things the police should have done and not five weeks into the commital which is set to finish this week, but the way things have gone, seems like more time will have to be assigned to mr sica's commital hearing which may get adjourned to continue later because of the police not providing all the material to the defense, and only providing what seems fit to them to implicate mr sica for the murders. i also found out that the dpp was unable to answer a simple question as to if any type of scientific examination took place in regards to the tyre tread patterns found in the area and if not, why not. mr zitny also said on the stand that an identicate photo had never been prepared, yet today one seems to have been provided to the defence barrister. for the sake of the singhs and sicas, i hope and pray that gods justice takes place and not that of men, as we all know that men are just vessels.
ARTICLE IN COURIER MAIL 15TH SEPTEMBER "MAX SICA NOT GETTING JUSTICE"
HERE IS LINK http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,,26072074-3102,00.htmlHonestly over 6 years and still when is the injustice going to end?
Thursday, September 10, 2009
Car 'like Max Sica's' near Singh house (courier mail)
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,26049965-3102,00.html
What the courier mail failed to further report is that tyre impressions were left where the so called blue like sedan was parked and did not match and no further investigations were made on the tracks. The car Mr Sica drove was considered black and not blue. Also there was a call made between Max and Neelma at around 11.10 pm from Max`s mobile to Neelma`s mobile.
ARTICLE FROM BRISBANE TIMES 2nd SEPTEMBER 2009
Detective Zitny said after the text was sent(at 8.56pm)on the night of Easter Sunday, there was a call from the Sica home phone to the Singh's home phone - a call which lasted for two minutes and 35 seconds.
Neelma then rang Sica's mobile phone for one second, which is followed by another 34-second call from Sica's to her mobile phone at 11.10pm.
It is estimated the siblings were killed some time late on Sunday or Easter Monday.
FURTHER INFORMATION ABOUT CAR IN PEPPER STREET::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
In 2003, there were only 2 houses on pepper st. the "small's" indicated they had seen a dark blue 4 door sedan parked at the end of the street, during cross examination by mr Di Carlo, Miss Small and her boyfriend said that they had seen the car twice that night, once around 8 pm when they went over to have dinner with Mr and Mrs Small, and again at around 10.30 pm as the boyfriend was leaving. Mrs Tiyor (the daughter in law of the neighbours across the road) under cross examination stated that she had gone over to her inlaws house to spend the easter weekend there, whilst there on one of the nights, her brother in law had parked the car for her on Pepper Street. Apart from this, tread patterns were found in the area that the Smalls had described where the car had been parked, yet the lead detective Joe Zitny, was unable to answer any questions in relation to the enquiries made in respect of the tread patterns found in the area and the examination of the tyres on all the Sica vehicles (which they had taken in the same week of the murders and then took the cars again one year later). He was asked to provide all the documents in relation to this enquiry about 2 weeks ago and failed to do so, and all he had to say was that he would look into the matter. Even when Mr Di Carlo asked a simple question about whether the tyres of all the Sica vehicles had been examined, he was unable to provide a simple yes or no.
ALSO::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Neighbour heard screams from Singh home
Friday, 11 September 2009
Page 1
A neighbour was awoken by chilling screams on the night three siblings were murdered in their Brisbane suburban home, a court has heard.
Alicia Frances was giving evidence in the committal hearing of Max Sica, 39, in the Brisbane Magistrates Court on Friday.
Sica is accused of the murders of Neelma, 24, Kunal, 18, and Sidhi Singh, 12, who were found dead in the spa of the home in the outer Brisbane suburb of Bridgeman Downs in April 2003.
Ms Frances, who lives 150 metres from the Singh home, told the court that she heard what sounded like the screams of a woman for "three to four minutes" and woke her husband.
"It frightened me so I said to my husband 'Get out of bed, something has frightened me - I want you to get up and see what it is'," she said.
"It chilled me to the bone actually.
"I think it was an adult female."
She said she did not know the origin of the screams only the general direction of them.
The next day she phoned the police after hearing a call for public information in the media.
She contacted police again a few days later with more information after realising she had seen two males riding bikes in the area at dawn the day before the alleged murders occurred.
Police at the time showed her a photo board with 12 images of men and she identified the image of Sica, who was Neelma's former boyfriend, as being "similar" to one of the men on bikes.
"I can't say it's that person," she said in a police interview video shown to the court. "It's similar to that person."
The hearing continues next week.
Screams Mrs Frances heard were on the Monday night early into the following Tuesday morning around midnight to half past midnight.
Even though the screams were bone chlling and Mrs Frances awoke her husband, no one actually called the police or went to see what was going on.
Sica 'sobbing and red-eyed' in gutterAMELIA BENTLEY
September 4, 2009
Accused killer Max Sica was sobbing and distraught as he sat in the gutter outside the home where he had just discovered the bodies of the Singh siblings, a police officer who interviewed him at the scene has recalled.
Brisbane Magistrates Court yesterday heard evidence from Sergeant Daniel Bonwick who was one of several police officers who arrived at the Singh's Bridgeman Downs house on April 22, 2003 after Sica called Triple-O to report there were "three dead bodies in a bathtub".
The bodies were later determined to be Neelma, 24, Kunal, 18 and 12-year-old Sidhi Singh who were all killed in different ways in the house while their parents were away in Fiji on business.
Last year, 39-year-old Sica, a former neighbour of the Singhs and ex-boyfriend of Neelma's, was charged with the killings.
On day 15 of a committal hearing Sergeant Bonwick said that as he arrived at the Grass Tree Close home he saw a man he later discovered was Sica in the cul-de-sac.
After Sica confirmed he was the person who called police, Sergeant Bonwick said he sat down in the gutter with him to ask him questions.
"He was sobbing, he had red eyes, (he was) very upset," he said.
Reading from the officer's notes, defence barrister Sam Di Carlo pointed out where Sergeant Bonwick claims to have heard Sica say he saw the body of Neelma's sister Archana in the spa must have been a mistake.
"You say he says; 'When I was pulling out the blanket (left over the bodies in the spa) Neelma's hand touched my hand, it was cold and wrinkly. I could also see Neelma's brother Kunal and Neelma's sister Archana'," Mr Di Carlo read.
Archana Pathik, however, was not in the spa that day but was at work when Sica, in the presence of Sergeant Bonwick outside the house, phoned her to tell her the tragic news, the court was told.
Sergeant Bonwick said Sica had asked him to call her but he said he would not.
"I didn't want to have to talk to someone and tell them their family may be dead," he said.
However Sica phoned Mrs Pathik and then handed the phone to the officer, he said.
Asked by Mr Di Carlo if he thought Sica had been faking his emotions, Sergeant Bonwick replied that he did not believe so.
"Why would I? Whatever he saw inside (the house) .. he was upset," he said.
DET ZITNY STATED THAT HE THOUGHT MAX SICA SEEMED COOL AND CALM. THREE DAYS LATER WHEN MAX SICA WAS TAKEN THROUGH SINGH HOUSE, DET ZITNY STATED HE THOUGHT MAX SICA FAKED HIS FEELINGS OF GRIEF. VIDEO FOOTAGE OF MAX SICA IN SINGH HOME WALKTHROUGH WAS SHOWN IN COURT, HE WAS TRULY TRAUMATISED AND DEVASTATED.
What the courier mail failed to further report is that tyre impressions were left where the so called blue like sedan was parked and did not match and no further investigations were made on the tracks. The car Mr Sica drove was considered black and not blue. Also there was a call made between Max and Neelma at around 11.10 pm from Max`s mobile to Neelma`s mobile.
ARTICLE FROM BRISBANE TIMES 2nd SEPTEMBER 2009
Detective Zitny said after the text was sent(at 8.56pm)on the night of Easter Sunday, there was a call from the Sica home phone to the Singh's home phone - a call which lasted for two minutes and 35 seconds.
Neelma then rang Sica's mobile phone for one second, which is followed by another 34-second call from Sica's to her mobile phone at 11.10pm.
It is estimated the siblings were killed some time late on Sunday or Easter Monday.
FURTHER INFORMATION ABOUT CAR IN PEPPER STREET::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
In 2003, there were only 2 houses on pepper st. the "small's" indicated they had seen a dark blue 4 door sedan parked at the end of the street, during cross examination by mr Di Carlo, Miss Small and her boyfriend said that they had seen the car twice that night, once around 8 pm when they went over to have dinner with Mr and Mrs Small, and again at around 10.30 pm as the boyfriend was leaving. Mrs Tiyor (the daughter in law of the neighbours across the road) under cross examination stated that she had gone over to her inlaws house to spend the easter weekend there, whilst there on one of the nights, her brother in law had parked the car for her on Pepper Street. Apart from this, tread patterns were found in the area that the Smalls had described where the car had been parked, yet the lead detective Joe Zitny, was unable to answer any questions in relation to the enquiries made in respect of the tread patterns found in the area and the examination of the tyres on all the Sica vehicles (which they had taken in the same week of the murders and then took the cars again one year later). He was asked to provide all the documents in relation to this enquiry about 2 weeks ago and failed to do so, and all he had to say was that he would look into the matter. Even when Mr Di Carlo asked a simple question about whether the tyres of all the Sica vehicles had been examined, he was unable to provide a simple yes or no.
ALSO::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Neighbour heard screams from Singh home
Friday, 11 September 2009
Page 1
A neighbour was awoken by chilling screams on the night three siblings were murdered in their Brisbane suburban home, a court has heard.
Alicia Frances was giving evidence in the committal hearing of Max Sica, 39, in the Brisbane Magistrates Court on Friday.
Sica is accused of the murders of Neelma, 24, Kunal, 18, and Sidhi Singh, 12, who were found dead in the spa of the home in the outer Brisbane suburb of Bridgeman Downs in April 2003.
Ms Frances, who lives 150 metres from the Singh home, told the court that she heard what sounded like the screams of a woman for "three to four minutes" and woke her husband.
"It frightened me so I said to my husband 'Get out of bed, something has frightened me - I want you to get up and see what it is'," she said.
"It chilled me to the bone actually.
"I think it was an adult female."
She said she did not know the origin of the screams only the general direction of them.
The next day she phoned the police after hearing a call for public information in the media.
She contacted police again a few days later with more information after realising she had seen two males riding bikes in the area at dawn the day before the alleged murders occurred.
Police at the time showed her a photo board with 12 images of men and she identified the image of Sica, who was Neelma's former boyfriend, as being "similar" to one of the men on bikes.
"I can't say it's that person," she said in a police interview video shown to the court. "It's similar to that person."
The hearing continues next week.
Screams Mrs Frances heard were on the Monday night early into the following Tuesday morning around midnight to half past midnight.
Even though the screams were bone chlling and Mrs Frances awoke her husband, no one actually called the police or went to see what was going on.
Sica 'sobbing and red-eyed' in gutterAMELIA BENTLEY
September 4, 2009
Accused killer Max Sica was sobbing and distraught as he sat in the gutter outside the home where he had just discovered the bodies of the Singh siblings, a police officer who interviewed him at the scene has recalled.
Brisbane Magistrates Court yesterday heard evidence from Sergeant Daniel Bonwick who was one of several police officers who arrived at the Singh's Bridgeman Downs house on April 22, 2003 after Sica called Triple-O to report there were "three dead bodies in a bathtub".
The bodies were later determined to be Neelma, 24, Kunal, 18 and 12-year-old Sidhi Singh who were all killed in different ways in the house while their parents were away in Fiji on business.
Last year, 39-year-old Sica, a former neighbour of the Singhs and ex-boyfriend of Neelma's, was charged with the killings.
On day 15 of a committal hearing Sergeant Bonwick said that as he arrived at the Grass Tree Close home he saw a man he later discovered was Sica in the cul-de-sac.
After Sica confirmed he was the person who called police, Sergeant Bonwick said he sat down in the gutter with him to ask him questions.
"He was sobbing, he had red eyes, (he was) very upset," he said.
Reading from the officer's notes, defence barrister Sam Di Carlo pointed out where Sergeant Bonwick claims to have heard Sica say he saw the body of Neelma's sister Archana in the spa must have been a mistake.
"You say he says; 'When I was pulling out the blanket (left over the bodies in the spa) Neelma's hand touched my hand, it was cold and wrinkly. I could also see Neelma's brother Kunal and Neelma's sister Archana'," Mr Di Carlo read.
Archana Pathik, however, was not in the spa that day but was at work when Sica, in the presence of Sergeant Bonwick outside the house, phoned her to tell her the tragic news, the court was told.
Sergeant Bonwick said Sica had asked him to call her but he said he would not.
"I didn't want to have to talk to someone and tell them their family may be dead," he said.
However Sica phoned Mrs Pathik and then handed the phone to the officer, he said.
Asked by Mr Di Carlo if he thought Sica had been faking his emotions, Sergeant Bonwick replied that he did not believe so.
"Why would I? Whatever he saw inside (the house) .. he was upset," he said.
DET ZITNY STATED THAT HE THOUGHT MAX SICA SEEMED COOL AND CALM. THREE DAYS LATER WHEN MAX SICA WAS TAKEN THROUGH SINGH HOUSE, DET ZITNY STATED HE THOUGHT MAX SICA FAKED HIS FEELINGS OF GRIEF. VIDEO FOOTAGE OF MAX SICA IN SINGH HOME WALKTHROUGH WAS SHOWN IN COURT, HE WAS TRULY TRAUMATISED AND DEVASTATED.
Saturday, September 5, 2009
MEDIA AND HOW I`VE LEARNT IT OPERATES
The media reaches millions of people each day. The media has a right to report the news and other happenings that occur across the country. What i dont understand about the media is how they can print something which they themselves know is untrue or they just print a sentence of something and dont bother printing the rest as so to twist the truth. Why does the media only print sensational headlines and then they do not bother to print the facts? The facts they hear in court, the ones like i have stated in this blog. Max has been hounded by media since the day he discovered the bodies. They even had him in the media for a traffic violation when the car he was driving had expired rego and insurance. The car belonged to a family member who had overlooked it and Max did not know this when he took the car out. Mind you they had printed the man who is accused of murdering the Singh siblings was today caught driving without rego or insurance and bla bla bla Any time they would print anything on him, that is how they would start their reporting. The media at the beginning had said that Max was infatuated and obsessed with Neelma, they did not say that he was her boyfriend, they made it look like he was her stalker. When Max went to the funeral the police knew he was going to be there and even had a car following him from his home to the funeral, Max went to the funeral with a female friend who lived next door to him. The media had printed that Max showed up at the funeral with his new girlfriend. These examples are only but a few. Max has been charged with a most horrendous crime and he is fighting for his freedom for practically his life. How can any person try to prove their innocence when the media is constantly feeding the public with untruths, biast and one sided reporting? I am not saying that the media should not print at all, i am saying that they should make sure of the facts before they print something and also print the other side of the story. If a normal citizen would go around saying or printing crap about someone else, they would be charged with defamation. In the end people will always form their own opinion, but the media should not ill inform the public for i am sure most are swayed by what they print.
Friday, September 4, 2009
FOR YOU FRED (and some unknown)
Fred....have you actually ever been to the committal hearing yourself? Are you sure that the opposite is true? I suggest you do go and sit through it and hear with your own ears. The media seems to write what they want and when the facts come out in the committal to the contrary, they seem not to be interested in printing it. The media are the ones i see to be biast and one sided. Fred, i just hope that one day you wont be accussed of something you know you didnt do and have to go through hell. It really isnt that far fetched.
Fred to answer your comment.......If he is not guilty then he has nothing to worry about....Do you think innocent people are put in jail Fred? Do you think that just because someone abides by the law it wont happen to them? Do you think that just because you happen to have a criminal record of something you did long ago, it gives others the right to automatically assume you are guilty of anything that you are accused of? There is no hard evidence Fred, you know why? the answer is simple, he did not do it. I believe in his innocence, i know who Max Sica is, do you know him personally Fred? Have you ever associated with him in any way Fred? This is not a forum Fred, like there are two sides to a coin, there are two sides to a story, and this blog is here to tell that other side. The media is not interested in reporting ALL the facts, so i will do it instead. Do you think that it is wrong of me to do so Fred? To be honest Fred, if you do or you dont, it does not make a difference to me. Like i said, i know who Max Sica is, and i know he is truly innocent.
AND NOW TO THE ANNONYMOUS ONE WHO COMMENTED ON MY GRAMMAR.....
I am not here to win a grammar competition so i really dont care what you think about it. You can have your laugh i suggest you keep on laughing you will need to. You know what i mean.....
I suggest you see further down the track there Fred as you can see was taken out.
TO THE ANNONYMOUS COMMENT MAKER (so called jackass)
You are always more than welcome to return to this blog and read up on further factual info. I suggest if you want to leave a comment, adhere to rules posted under the title of this blog. Like i have already stated, no foul, senseless, personal attack etc will be tollerated. If you want to make your point, try to do it using some sort of intelligence and common sense. If you think that you cannot do this, you can always just read on.
Fred to answer your comment.......If he is not guilty then he has nothing to worry about....Do you think innocent people are put in jail Fred? Do you think that just because someone abides by the law it wont happen to them? Do you think that just because you happen to have a criminal record of something you did long ago, it gives others the right to automatically assume you are guilty of anything that you are accused of? There is no hard evidence Fred, you know why? the answer is simple, he did not do it. I believe in his innocence, i know who Max Sica is, do you know him personally Fred? Have you ever associated with him in any way Fred? This is not a forum Fred, like there are two sides to a coin, there are two sides to a story, and this blog is here to tell that other side. The media is not interested in reporting ALL the facts, so i will do it instead. Do you think that it is wrong of me to do so Fred? To be honest Fred, if you do or you dont, it does not make a difference to me. Like i said, i know who Max Sica is, and i know he is truly innocent.
AND NOW TO THE ANNONYMOUS ONE WHO COMMENTED ON MY GRAMMAR.....
I am not here to win a grammar competition so i really dont care what you think about it. You can have your laugh i suggest you keep on laughing you will need to. You know what i mean.....
I suggest you see further down the track there Fred as you can see was taken out.
TO THE ANNONYMOUS COMMENT MAKER (so called jackass)
You are always more than welcome to return to this blog and read up on further factual info. I suggest if you want to leave a comment, adhere to rules posted under the title of this blog. Like i have already stated, no foul, senseless, personal attack etc will be tollerated. If you want to make your point, try to do it using some sort of intelligence and common sense. If you think that you cannot do this, you can always just read on.
Wednesday, September 2, 2009
ANSWERS OR MORE QUESTIONS?
The committal continues and more questions arise than answers. Why did police not investigate other areas of interest that were put forward to them? Example: One male was seen by two persons (who were taking a walk at 5 30 am Tuesday morning 22nd of April 2003) jumping a fence and disappearing, two cars were seen at the Singh residence at around 9 am the same morning by a neighbour. On Monday night at around 8 30 pm neighbours heard a loud horrible scream coming from around the area of the Singh`s home. An xtra large shirt was found at the Singh home and did not belong to anyone in the family or Max. Why did it take police 6 days to say they had discovered bleached footprint on the stairs and then wait one year to take Max`s footprints? The mother of the Singh children took a bloodied pillow from the crime scene and if it wasnt for her daughter Archana to say so, no one would have known it was missing. At this point i ask, was it only this item to go missing from the crime scene? Three days after discovering the bodies, Max was taken through the house and Det. Zitny said that he thought Max faked the grief he was feeling, Was Max already the prime suspect from the very beginning? Is this the reason why police did not further investigate the above mentioned leads? Neelma`s vehicle was fully inspected by forensics and shortly after it was sold by Mrs Singh to one of Neelma`s friends. He had cleaned the car thoroughly at least twice after he had bought it. On one occassion he had given Mrs Singh a lift and two days after had found a watch and other items belonging to Neelma in the car that had previously been reported missing by the Singh family. There are also issues involving drugs been taken and sold which have been heard at the hearing. These things have been stated at the committal but i have yet to read them in any newspaper report. I do not want to sound biast or one sided, but even if i did not know Max or anything at all about this case and as a simple person, i would be questioning this all the same.
I want justice for the Singh children just as much as anyone else or even more so as i know Max did not do this. I knew those three kids, i knew Neelma, Kunal and Sidhi, they are not just three names to me they are three human beings that did not deserve to have their lives end as it did and i truly hope and pray that the real culprit/s be caught so that they(the singh children)can truly have peace and Max can truly have his name cleared and innocence proven once and for all.
AND HOW ABOUT THE SO CALLED FOOTPRINT EVIDENCE...............
It's been six years in the making and the opening days of the committal hearing for the man accused of one of Brisbane's most shocking crimes had all the elements: sex scandals, violence, forbidden love and murder.
But the case of Max Sica has taken a decidedly pedestrian turn today.
A podiatrist has testified she cannot exclude the possibility a footprint left at the scene of the Singh siblings' murders belonged to the man accused of killing them.
Doctor Sara Jones told the Brisbane Magistrates Court she analysed footprint impressions made by Sica, 39, and footprints found at the Bridgeman Downs home where 24 year old Neelma, her 18-year-old brother Kunal, and 12-year-old sister Sidhi Singh, were killed in April 2003.
Sica, of Stafford, is charged with their murders.
The hearing last week heard Sica had been dating Neelma but the relationship ended when her father Vijay Singh forbade the two to see each other.
Dr Jones said it was possible a footprint on carpet at the house belonged to Sica.
She examined Sica's feet and had him make footprint impressions on paper at Petrie Police Station, she said.
"I was unable to find any characteristics that would exclude him (as a match)," she said.
(((((But under cross-examination by Mr Sica's lawyer, Dr Jones accepted hundreds of people's feet could also match the footprint at the scene.)))))
During an explosive two days of evidence last week, Mr Singh admitted beating Neelma with a pool cue, conducting extra-marital affairs and clashing with Sica over the older man's designs on his daughter.
He also accused Sica of trying to push him out of the family by making false accusations of sexual abuse against his youngest daughter, Sidhi Singh, and was quizzed by Sica's lawyers about his own role in his children's deaths.
Mr Singh is due to continue his evidence later today before his wife Shirley takes the stand.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AS STATED BY DR SARA JONES HERSELF IN AN ARTICLE...
“I was part of a team investigating a murder,” she said. “The person who actually committed the murder carried the body and dumped it in a swamp.
“We could prove the body was carried out, and did not return, because of the distance between the steps and the depth of the footprints going out through the mud varied considerably to those coming back. The evidence helped to convict the person.
“However, all podiatry evidence is circumstantial. The only definitive and absolute evidence is finger print evidence. Even DNA is still considered circumstantial, but when you add the information with other facts, it helps.
note: Both Dr Jones and Canadian Expert Robert Kennedy also stated that they could not even say when the fooprint was actually left at the scene. It could have been left before or even after. Plus like i have stated in this blog, police allege they found the so called footprint 6 days after the bodies were discovered, yet they took Max Sica`s footprints one year later in 2004. They made him wear all kinds of socks, thick, medium, thin and socks that were small for his feet too. They had his footprints since he voluntarily gave them over five years ago.
Also i would like to point out that the age gap between Max and Neelma is 8 yrs not 8decades. I did not see anyone be offended at the age of Mr Singh`s niece or other women he frequented. I only point this out because they always comment on the age difference but really, i do not see the significance.
I want justice for the Singh children just as much as anyone else or even more so as i know Max did not do this. I knew those three kids, i knew Neelma, Kunal and Sidhi, they are not just three names to me they are three human beings that did not deserve to have their lives end as it did and i truly hope and pray that the real culprit/s be caught so that they(the singh children)can truly have peace and Max can truly have his name cleared and innocence proven once and for all.
AND HOW ABOUT THE SO CALLED FOOTPRINT EVIDENCE...............
It's been six years in the making and the opening days of the committal hearing for the man accused of one of Brisbane's most shocking crimes had all the elements: sex scandals, violence, forbidden love and murder.
But the case of Max Sica has taken a decidedly pedestrian turn today.
A podiatrist has testified she cannot exclude the possibility a footprint left at the scene of the Singh siblings' murders belonged to the man accused of killing them.
Doctor Sara Jones told the Brisbane Magistrates Court she analysed footprint impressions made by Sica, 39, and footprints found at the Bridgeman Downs home where 24 year old Neelma, her 18-year-old brother Kunal, and 12-year-old sister Sidhi Singh, were killed in April 2003.
Sica, of Stafford, is charged with their murders.
The hearing last week heard Sica had been dating Neelma but the relationship ended when her father Vijay Singh forbade the two to see each other.
Dr Jones said it was possible a footprint on carpet at the house belonged to Sica.
She examined Sica's feet and had him make footprint impressions on paper at Petrie Police Station, she said.
"I was unable to find any characteristics that would exclude him (as a match)," she said.
(((((But under cross-examination by Mr Sica's lawyer, Dr Jones accepted hundreds of people's feet could also match the footprint at the scene.)))))
During an explosive two days of evidence last week, Mr Singh admitted beating Neelma with a pool cue, conducting extra-marital affairs and clashing with Sica over the older man's designs on his daughter.
He also accused Sica of trying to push him out of the family by making false accusations of sexual abuse against his youngest daughter, Sidhi Singh, and was quizzed by Sica's lawyers about his own role in his children's deaths.
Mr Singh is due to continue his evidence later today before his wife Shirley takes the stand.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AS STATED BY DR SARA JONES HERSELF IN AN ARTICLE...
“I was part of a team investigating a murder,” she said. “The person who actually committed the murder carried the body and dumped it in a swamp.
“We could prove the body was carried out, and did not return, because of the distance between the steps and the depth of the footprints going out through the mud varied considerably to those coming back. The evidence helped to convict the person.
“However, all podiatry evidence is circumstantial. The only definitive and absolute evidence is finger print evidence. Even DNA is still considered circumstantial, but when you add the information with other facts, it helps.
note: Both Dr Jones and Canadian Expert Robert Kennedy also stated that they could not even say when the fooprint was actually left at the scene. It could have been left before or even after. Plus like i have stated in this blog, police allege they found the so called footprint 6 days after the bodies were discovered, yet they took Max Sica`s footprints one year later in 2004. They made him wear all kinds of socks, thick, medium, thin and socks that were small for his feet too. They had his footprints since he voluntarily gave them over five years ago.
Also i would like to point out that the age gap between Max and Neelma is 8 yrs not 8decades. I did not see anyone be offended at the age of Mr Singh`s niece or other women he frequented. I only point this out because they always comment on the age difference but really, i do not see the significance.
Friday, August 21, 2009
COMMITTAL HEARING
Max was charged with the murders late last year because he was considered a flight risk and a threat, he was not charged because of any overwhelming evidence. As for the taped conversation between max and singh November 2002, well you can plainly hear that max was called there by the Singh children because they were scared. He did not just rock up at 1am in the morning take Mrs Singh side about an argument she and her husband were having about one of his affairs and start a confrontation with Mr Singh (like one particular paper i read reported). You can clearly hear on the tape Mrs Singh saying to Max "you have my permission to be here, are you going to protect me max" you can also hear max say to Mr Singh "dont worry, im not going to hurt you, what do you think i am like you? im just going to wait for the cops". At one point max says to Mr Singh, "put the weapon down" repeatedly. Mrs Singh is clearly heard making other accusations about her husband in english and in her own language. When this taped conversaton was leaked to media, the heading was Max threatened family. Dont forget, Mr Singh was knowingly taping the conversation and still made numerous threats to Max like, dont worry you`re gonna get it, you dont know what im capable of,you will see etc. Were these threats printed in any paper?
Police was called by both Max and Singh im sure they have proof that Max was called to the residence via his mobile phone and sms messages, and im sure they have statements from the rest of the Singh family too.
It is really astonoshing how A paper could print out sheer and utter untruths when they were there to hear a taped conversation that was played in court of an argument between Mr Singh and Max Sica.
In a case of this magnitude where an innocent man is fighting for his life, how can it be that A newspaper (hearing it with their OWN ears and not any kind of heresay)can print such utter lies? It is truly dumbfounding. Six years on and still we ask ourselves, where is the justice? How is a man suppose to defend himself when the public is continuously been fed complete rubbish based on a trial by media who can destroy a persons character and legally get away with it?
Im not saying that they have to make Max out to be a choir boy, for yes, he has got a criminal record, but just because you havent got a criminal record, it doesnt make you a choir boy either.
Police was called by both Max and Singh im sure they have proof that Max was called to the residence via his mobile phone and sms messages, and im sure they have statements from the rest of the Singh family too.
It is really astonoshing how A paper could print out sheer and utter untruths when they were there to hear a taped conversation that was played in court of an argument between Mr Singh and Max Sica.
In a case of this magnitude where an innocent man is fighting for his life, how can it be that A newspaper (hearing it with their OWN ears and not any kind of heresay)can print such utter lies? It is truly dumbfounding. Six years on and still we ask ourselves, where is the justice? How is a man suppose to defend himself when the public is continuously been fed complete rubbish based on a trial by media who can destroy a persons character and legally get away with it?
Im not saying that they have to make Max out to be a choir boy, for yes, he has got a criminal record, but just because you havent got a criminal record, it doesnt make you a choir boy either.
Thursday, August 20, 2009
ANSWERS TO SOME NEW COMMENTS MADE
THIS IS A COMMENT MADE
I am a bit confused! if max is not guilty and he has been held by the police for so long, how come you haven't been able to prove to the court his alibi? from the press reports it is clear max has been trying to destroy a family...or else how come neelima didn't walk out of the house? and the other kids and the wife?
ANSWER TO THIS COMMENT
First of all police dont know when the children died. There have been statements from his family and other people who were with Max on the two days prior to discovering the kids. As for the final remark you made about ... or else how come Neelma etc, well i just think that doesnt deserve any type of response because it is just so senseless. By the way, the wife is alive and living in the house.
DARONS COMMENT well yours is just a personal attack and just lacking any kind of anything.
NOT TAKING TRIAL SERIOUSLY COMMENT you are very mistaken, but like Daron, you may think as you see fit.
COMMENT MADE
Vijay isn't the one on trial so he has no need to refute anything. I'm not denying or approving anything that he has done but no matter what dirt is dug up from this case it still doesn't change that Max murdered the Singh's. Innocent until proven guilty - i completely support but I know both families and both sides of the story and he will be found guilty - even if his family have to commit pergury to give him an alibi - it still won't be enough to save him. See you in court.
ANSWER TO COMMENT no one in his family would ever commit pergury, whomever you are you said you know both families, so im quite sure that if you did, you would know that. But like i stated, you may also have your opinion, and yes, definitly see you in court.
As for your comment Fred, yes we will see.
COMMENT MADE
I believe in innocent until proven guilty and the principals of that. I'll be honest and say I don't know a lot about this case, and I think it is great that you are supporting Max the way you are. I do have a question though - how can you be so sure of Max's innocence? There are a lot of people out there that would have said the same thing about their family and friends, but, when the truth came out in the end they were guilty! Have you thought about that at all??
ANSWER.... Absolutely... and all i can tell you is that i know he is no murderer because i have no doubt whatsoever. But i can understand your point as you do not know him personally and you are also somewhat influenced by media that does not always print the truth.
I am a bit confused! if max is not guilty and he has been held by the police for so long, how come you haven't been able to prove to the court his alibi? from the press reports it is clear max has been trying to destroy a family...or else how come neelima didn't walk out of the house? and the other kids and the wife?
ANSWER TO THIS COMMENT
First of all police dont know when the children died. There have been statements from his family and other people who were with Max on the two days prior to discovering the kids. As for the final remark you made about ... or else how come Neelma etc, well i just think that doesnt deserve any type of response because it is just so senseless. By the way, the wife is alive and living in the house.
DARONS COMMENT well yours is just a personal attack and just lacking any kind of anything.
NOT TAKING TRIAL SERIOUSLY COMMENT you are very mistaken, but like Daron, you may think as you see fit.
COMMENT MADE
Vijay isn't the one on trial so he has no need to refute anything. I'm not denying or approving anything that he has done but no matter what dirt is dug up from this case it still doesn't change that Max murdered the Singh's. Innocent until proven guilty - i completely support but I know both families and both sides of the story and he will be found guilty - even if his family have to commit pergury to give him an alibi - it still won't be enough to save him. See you in court.
ANSWER TO COMMENT no one in his family would ever commit pergury, whomever you are you said you know both families, so im quite sure that if you did, you would know that. But like i stated, you may also have your opinion, and yes, definitly see you in court.
As for your comment Fred, yes we will see.
COMMENT MADE
I believe in innocent until proven guilty and the principals of that. I'll be honest and say I don't know a lot about this case, and I think it is great that you are supporting Max the way you are. I do have a question though - how can you be so sure of Max's innocence? There are a lot of people out there that would have said the same thing about their family and friends, but, when the truth came out in the end they were guilty! Have you thought about that at all??
ANSWER.... Absolutely... and all i can tell you is that i know he is no murderer because i have no doubt whatsoever. But i can understand your point as you do not know him personally and you are also somewhat influenced by media that does not always print the truth.
Friday, July 24, 2009
The so-called law good for others but unfair for themselves?
Queensland Police Union disputes misconduct report
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,25822723-3102,00.html
NOTE...................................
Poor things, they cant have an unfair TRIAL BY MEDIA but the rest of the population can
"Those three people before the courts have the right to be dealt with by the courts, not dealt with by trial by media or by the public, or the CMC when they release this stuff publicly," he said.
Mr Max Sica was, has been and is being hounded by media. False accusations, arrested without any shred of proof or motive, hounded and spied upon by police practically 24 hrs a day, a lot of untruths or half truths stated in papers and media, TRIAL BY MEDIA since the day he, his two children and his niece discovered the bodies at the Singh residence.
Now that some police have come into question over certain ALLEGATIONS, i see that they do not like to get the same treatment that Mr Max Sica (and others) has endured and is still enduring over these past six years. Why??????? Because it is wrong to have done upon you what has been done upon him.
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,25822723-3102,00.html
NOTE...................................
Poor things, they cant have an unfair TRIAL BY MEDIA but the rest of the population can
"Those three people before the courts have the right to be dealt with by the courts, not dealt with by trial by media or by the public, or the CMC when they release this stuff publicly," he said.
Mr Max Sica was, has been and is being hounded by media. False accusations, arrested without any shred of proof or motive, hounded and spied upon by police practically 24 hrs a day, a lot of untruths or half truths stated in papers and media, TRIAL BY MEDIA since the day he, his two children and his niece discovered the bodies at the Singh residence.
Now that some police have come into question over certain ALLEGATIONS, i see that they do not like to get the same treatment that Mr Max Sica (and others) has endured and is still enduring over these past six years. Why??????? Because it is wrong to have done upon you what has been done upon him.
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
FOR YOU MAX WE LOVE YOU
Don`t dispair, don`t give up, the day is nearing when the truth will be out. We know who you are and we know what you feel, we pray for you each day as we kneel. You would give your own life to save that of another, you are just that way, it`s not only a cover. Hold on to your faith and keep yourself strong, we know you will be free, it won`t be long. Remember we love you we are always near, hold your head up and never fear. The day is coming don`t dispair, we love you max, we will always be there
Thursday, April 23, 2009
EYE OPENER FOR ALL + (question for Jenny)
Hi Jenny, i have noted you say that you worked on the Graham Stafford case. Are you a lawyer or someone in the legal system? I have also seen a program which was aired on the abc called Australian Story Body of Evidence parts 1 and 2 on this story. I have been crusing on other blogs and have read some peoples comments saying that the police must now have sufficent evidence and that`s why Max Sica was charged with the triple homicide. If you see the program about Graham Stafford, you will all see that justice definitly was not served when they put away this man for a crime he did not commit. In this case, they said they had plenty of evidence and that he was the man who killed that poor 12yr old girl. My heart goes out to this man and his family because i know what they must have and are still going through. The real murderer is free because from the very beginning police had targeted who they wanted, they did not care to investigate any other avenues at all. How can this be done to a person? Also he is now facing deportation to England and been bared from speaking to any media as part of his parole conditions. Not all is as it is presented to you people, nothing is black and white, and not all persons in the police force are honest ones. All people be it politicians, police, lawyers, bankers, labourers, news and media persons or anyone for that matter are just that, people. There is good and bad in every field. None of us are Gods either. It is easy to judge another even if you dont know them. Some media also play their part. Anyway here are the links to the program on abc, a real eyeopener for most people
http://www.abc.net.au/austory/specials/bodyofevidence/default.htm
http://www.abc.net.au/austory/specials/bodyofevidence2/default.htm
http://www.abc.net.au/austory/specials/bodyofevidence/default.htm
http://www.abc.net.au/austory/specials/bodyofevidence2/default.htm
Thursday, March 26, 2009
NOW AFTER SIX YEARS SINGH`S SUE FOR TRESPASSING?
Is this a new way to attack Max Sica? Sue him for trespassing for the day of when he,( his two children aged 5 and 11 and his niece aged 10)discovered the horrendous scene on the 22nd April 2003. Are they going to serve trespassing warrants for the children as well? Just another example of another incredule injustice. Six years on and still finding ways to have him in the public eye and try to further assassinate his character and try to use any tactic available. I am utterly amazed and dumbfounded as to what lengths so called JUSTICE is willing to go. If you are saying to yourself, who cares, doesn`t affect me, he must be guilty etc etc. Well think again because next time it could happen to you or one of your loved ones to find themselves in the same situtation that Max Sica is right now.
We are a civilized country right? People do have their rights dont they? Truth and Justice will always be the case for everyone right?
link to story http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,25246888-2,00.html?from=public_rss
We are a civilized country right? People do have their rights dont they? Truth and Justice will always be the case for everyone right?
link to story http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,25246888-2,00.html?from=public_rss
Monday, March 23, 2009
THE DAY IS COMING
The day is coming for the real truth to be heard by everyone and i mean the whole REAL truth with all the facts and not just snippets of things even untrue ones that have been stated till now. It seems to amaze me at just how quick some people are able to judge another without knowing nothing at all about that person or relying purely on what is printed in a newspaper or hearing hearsay here and there. The crime that Max Sica has been charged with is a most hideous crime. He has not been charged with some stupidity but with the murder of three innocent people. He is fighting practically for his life and his freedom because mark my words, this man is INNOCENT. In this country though, it seems that you are GUILTY first and then its up to you to prove your innoncence while the law does to you as it pleases. I admit that the police have to do their job by investigating everyone and seeking all avenues, but the problem here is that they have not investigated all avenues, they have pinpointed their whole case on one person and that person happens to be Max.
It has been 6 yrs nothing has changed there is no smoking gun, there is no witness, there is no valid motive for Max to have committed such a horrible thing. To be put behind bars because after 6yrs you are considered to be a flight risk or you are now considered to be a psycopath is really incredule.
To go and visit someone in jail and be told you did not pass a drug test scanner thing and so you cannot see that person is another injustice. His mother has had this done to her twice, also a number of other people have had this done to them. They ask to be strip searched but not allowed, ask for the readout of what it is that the machine has picked up and that not allowed. I dont get it, how could this be done over and over again and without explanation? I think its time the machines get updated or that other measures are taken when the machine has (what they say) a positive readout. We are Australian Citizens and i think we do still have rights, at least i believe so. I believe that when people visit friends and loved ones in jail, they should be treated like all Australian Citizens are treated, with respect. I am logically not talking about the whole prison system and all the people that work in them, i am stating a part of it which i think needs to have a huge review. As for the prisoners themselves they too have their rights and one of them is that just because you have been put in a prison pending a trial or whatever, does not mean you are automatically guilty. I really cant fathom being put in a prison and not being guilty of what you are accused of, but of course we all know that it happens, and it happens too frequently.
It has been 6 yrs nothing has changed there is no smoking gun, there is no witness, there is no valid motive for Max to have committed such a horrible thing. To be put behind bars because after 6yrs you are considered to be a flight risk or you are now considered to be a psycopath is really incredule.
To go and visit someone in jail and be told you did not pass a drug test scanner thing and so you cannot see that person is another injustice. His mother has had this done to her twice, also a number of other people have had this done to them. They ask to be strip searched but not allowed, ask for the readout of what it is that the machine has picked up and that not allowed. I dont get it, how could this be done over and over again and without explanation? I think its time the machines get updated or that other measures are taken when the machine has (what they say) a positive readout. We are Australian Citizens and i think we do still have rights, at least i believe so. I believe that when people visit friends and loved ones in jail, they should be treated like all Australian Citizens are treated, with respect. I am logically not talking about the whole prison system and all the people that work in them, i am stating a part of it which i think needs to have a huge review. As for the prisoners themselves they too have their rights and one of them is that just because you have been put in a prison pending a trial or whatever, does not mean you are automatically guilty. I really cant fathom being put in a prison and not being guilty of what you are accused of, but of course we all know that it happens, and it happens too frequently.
Sunday, March 22, 2009
THIS IF FOR(nick)THE FOUL MOUTHED COMMENT MAKER
First of all i would have left your comments if they had not been so vile and full of discusting language but i guess thats the person you are. You stated you could not say goodbye at the funeral because Max was there, well that is a laugh in itself because no one could stop you from doing anything that you wanted to do. I was there myself, max was escorted out by police after only five minutes that he had been there, even though police had asked and known all week that his family including himself was going to be there. Also you would have been 12yrs old at the time so i am sure you would have been accompanied there. As for your comments on him being a cold blooded murderer etc etc well all i can say is that its people like yourself that have no knowledge of all the facts and already decide to be judge, jury and executioner that brings out the worst in human kind. I knew Sidhi, Kunal and Neelma very well, I knew Shirley very well too. We are not animals that dont know how the parents could feel after their children have been taken from them in such a horrible, horrendous way. BUT i can also feel for Max Sica and his family who not only grieved the loss of those children, but then have had to go through the turmoil that followed and is still going on. Max Sica is no cold blooded murderer and as you may have your opinion, i have mine. The difference is that i know Max Sica, i have known him all his life. If you read the head title of this blog, you must have read all of it. Excluding any foul language. Abide by it if you can or dont post at all. You see i dont care if you want to state your opinion which would differ from mine, but do it in a respectable manner without resorting to foul language and just a lot of air.
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
HOW ABOUT THE COST OF DEFENDING YOURSELF
This case has been quoted by police as being the biggerst criminal case in QLD history. So not only are you charged with a murder you did not commit, but then you have to pay a fortune for your defence. Absurd costs to defend yourself for a case of this magnitude. Yet again the prosecution will get the best there is and the Sica family been told to get legal aid lawyers. It is absolutely unfair and unjust. When will all this injustice end?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
