WE ARE WITH YOU

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

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

WE LOVE YOU AND WILL ALWAYS BE BY YOUR SIDE.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

COMMENTS FROM ABOVE NEWS ARTICLE

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

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

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

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

The edited list Mr Di Carlo gave the jury:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

To all concerned

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

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

POINTS TO CONSIDER

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

THE FACTS SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES

MOTIVE

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

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

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

There are many witnesses that could not be called.

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

PLEASE NOTE....

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

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

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

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

WHAT IS JUSTICE......

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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