Court told Max Sica `confided in writer'
Lisa Martin From: AAP September 24, 2010 4:49PM
A MAN accused of slaying three siblings told a woman writing a book about him that she would become famous if she got his confession, a court has heard.
Neelma Singh, 24, and her siblings Kunal, 18, and Sidhi, 12, were found dead in the spa at their family's Brisbane home on April 22, 2003.
Max Sica, who was Neelma's boyfriend in the months before her death, is facing three charges of murder.
A committal hearing in Brisbane Magistrates Court on Friday heard Sica had been approached to write a book, but he thought his friend Andrea Louise Bowman could do a better job.
Ms Bowman kept diary notes about conversations she had with Sica in 2007.
She said Sica would sometimes become "paranoid", ask her if she was a police officer and wonder aloud if she was scared in his company.
"He asked if I had video surveillance in my sunglasses," she told the committal hearing.
"(During another conversation) he told me 'If you got my confession you would be famous . . . and get paid'."
The court heard Ms Bowman told Sica she had a dream about the killings.
"There were gurgling sounds . . . I just wanted the sound to stop," she said.
"(Sica) said: 'Maybe that's why I ran the spa."'
She said Sica told her Neelma had a bad temper and slept with a machete under her bed.
Ms Bowman told the court she recalled asking Sica whether he killed the children to get back at their mother Shirley Singh, who the court had earlier in the week heard was having an affair with a younger man.
"He said: 'Yes, I blame her, she should never have taken him back'," she said.
Ms Bowman said she had asked Sica if he panicked after killing the Singh siblings.
"He said: 'Of course you panic, you just killed those bitches, you have to get out of there'," she said.
She told the court she remembered telling Sica about a comment his mother had made: "What kind of monster kills them and puts them in a bath to make them into soup?"
"He asked: 'Did she say that?' I said: 'Yes, she said that to me on the phone'... (and) he hung his head," she said.
Defence counsel Sam Di Carlo told the court Ms Bowman had worked with police for four years under the guise of writing a book and her witness statement resembled a Mills and Boon fiction novel.
The committal hearing continues.
Friday, September 24, 2010
COMMITTAL THURSDAY 23RD SEPT
Friend pens book about Singh murder accused Max Sica
Jasmin Lill From: The Courier-Mail September 23, 2010 11:51PM
THE man accused of slaying three siblings was the subject of a book being written by a friend, a court has been told.
Max Sica, 40, is in custody facing a committal hearing in the Brisbane Magistrates Court charged with killing his former girlfriend Neelma Singh, 24, her brother Kunal, 18, and sister Sidhi, 12. Their bodies were found in a spa at their Bridgeman Downs home, on Brisbane's northside, in April 2003.
Sica's friend Andrea Louise Bowman said Sica had been approached to write a book after the killings but he thought she would do it better.
Bowman said she produced four or five pages to show to Sica but she described it as a ''mock book''.
''I was very interested in finding out what was going on with Max. There were way too many inconsistencies,'' she said.
Bowman said Sica was pleased with what she had written, which included a piece on people who had been wrongly imprisoned and later found to be innocent.
She said Sica agreed to get a copy of his criminal record to include in the book, and also posed for pictures.
''I said if he got arrested and taken away, I wouldn't have access to him to take a photo,'' Bowman said.
She said that as she entered his house for a photo shoot in 2006, Sica had checked her camera for listening devices.
While speaking to Sica, she said he spoke of holding Neelma's hand after finding her in the spa. ''He said, `I held Neelma's hand to say goodbye.' He said it was normal, it was soft,'' Bowman said.
But she said Sica later described Neelma's hand as ''curled over and stiff''.
During another conversation in Sica's bedroom, Bowman said Sica got ''glassy-eyed'' and his expression changed. ''He said, 'Do you ever think you're lucky I didn't kill you?'.'' she recounted.
She said Sica came close to her with a nail file and said: ''I could kill you right now.''
''He looked gleeful, like this was arousing,'' she said. She told the court she was starting to see ''both sides'' of her friend's personality.
''There's the soft, supportive, protective side, then there's the other side that's more venomous,'' she said. ''Max will either adore or despise you. If he despised you, you were going to be in trouble.''
After the pair met up at the Everton Park Hotel in 2007, Bowman said Sica told her: ''If I ever find out you're talking to the detectives, I'll take you for a little drive.''
Defence counsel Sam Di Carlo said Bowman had worked with police for four years under the guise of writing the book, and that her witness statement resembled a Mills and Boon.
The hearing continues.
Jasmin Lill From: The Courier-Mail September 23, 2010 11:51PM
THE man accused of slaying three siblings was the subject of a book being written by a friend, a court has been told.
Max Sica, 40, is in custody facing a committal hearing in the Brisbane Magistrates Court charged with killing his former girlfriend Neelma Singh, 24, her brother Kunal, 18, and sister Sidhi, 12. Their bodies were found in a spa at their Bridgeman Downs home, on Brisbane's northside, in April 2003.
Sica's friend Andrea Louise Bowman said Sica had been approached to write a book after the killings but he thought she would do it better.
Bowman said she produced four or five pages to show to Sica but she described it as a ''mock book''.
''I was very interested in finding out what was going on with Max. There were way too many inconsistencies,'' she said.
Bowman said Sica was pleased with what she had written, which included a piece on people who had been wrongly imprisoned and later found to be innocent.
She said Sica agreed to get a copy of his criminal record to include in the book, and also posed for pictures.
''I said if he got arrested and taken away, I wouldn't have access to him to take a photo,'' Bowman said.
She said that as she entered his house for a photo shoot in 2006, Sica had checked her camera for listening devices.
While speaking to Sica, she said he spoke of holding Neelma's hand after finding her in the spa. ''He said, `I held Neelma's hand to say goodbye.' He said it was normal, it was soft,'' Bowman said.
But she said Sica later described Neelma's hand as ''curled over and stiff''.
During another conversation in Sica's bedroom, Bowman said Sica got ''glassy-eyed'' and his expression changed. ''He said, 'Do you ever think you're lucky I didn't kill you?'.'' she recounted.
She said Sica came close to her with a nail file and said: ''I could kill you right now.''
''He looked gleeful, like this was arousing,'' she said. She told the court she was starting to see ''both sides'' of her friend's personality.
''There's the soft, supportive, protective side, then there's the other side that's more venomous,'' she said. ''Max will either adore or despise you. If he despised you, you were going to be in trouble.''
After the pair met up at the Everton Park Hotel in 2007, Bowman said Sica told her: ''If I ever find out you're talking to the detectives, I'll take you for a little drive.''
Defence counsel Sam Di Carlo said Bowman had worked with police for four years under the guise of writing the book, and that her witness statement resembled a Mills and Boon.
The hearing continues.
Thursday, September 23, 2010
COMMITTAL WEDNESDAY 22ND SEPT
Singh murder accused Max Sica threatened kill spree and police HQ attack, court told
Jasmin Lill From: The Courier-Mail September 22, 2010 11:23PM
ALLEGED triple murderer Max Sica boasted he would blow up Queensland Police headquarters and go on a killing spree, slaying more people than the man responsible for the Port Arthur massacre, a court heard yesterday.
The Singh siblings Neelma, 24, Kunal, 18, and Sidhi, 12, were killed in their home at Bridgeman Downs on Brisbane's northside in April 2003.
Sica, 40, is in custody facing a committal hearing in the Brisbane Magistrate's Court.
His friend Andrea Louise Bowman told the court Sica had spoken to her in the aftermath of the deaths.
"He said, 'I'm going to be done for the murders and when I do, I'm going to blow up the Roma St police headquarters','' she said.
Bowman claimed Sica said he would go on a killing spree, killing more people than the man responsible for the Port Arthur massacre, Martin Bryant, but wouldn't be dumb enough to get caught for it.
"He gets a lot of fan mail in prison,'' Sica allegedly said of Bryant.
Bowman said she also spoke to Sica about a news story where the Singh family had produced a letter from Kunal "beyond the grave" where he "wrote" to his murderer.
"Max scoffed and said, 'why didn't I get one then?''' Bowman said.
She and Sica hypothesised about how the murders had occurred, and Sica said he was on to "the real killer".
"He said, 'I'm going to find them, I'm doing my own investigation'."
The court heard Sica also told Bowman how he'd discovered the three siblings dead in the spa.
Sica told her he'd gone to the house to take them to the movies but when no-one answered, he went inside.
Bowman said Sica told her how he turned off the running tap of the spa, and used a stick to lift blankets off it before a hand popped out.
"I knew it was Sidhi's because it was small,'' Sica allegedly told Bowman.
She said Sica also told her about finding girlfriend Neelma, who appeared to have a gunshot wound in her chest.
Bowman said Sica had told her the siblings' father Vijay was a violent man, and that Neelma was planning to leave as soon as she came into some money.
She claimed Sica said "anyway, they're better off dead".
Bowman also said Sica told her he'd done "all my crying" in the first three days after the siblings were discovered.
The hearing continues.
_______________________________________________________________
Ms Bowman also ALLEGES in court that, Max told her he had a HIT LIST and that she (Bowman) was on THE TOP of this list. BUT it appears she continued seeing him many, many times after.
Jasmin Lill From: The Courier-Mail September 22, 2010 11:23PM
ALLEGED triple murderer Max Sica boasted he would blow up Queensland Police headquarters and go on a killing spree, slaying more people than the man responsible for the Port Arthur massacre, a court heard yesterday.
The Singh siblings Neelma, 24, Kunal, 18, and Sidhi, 12, were killed in their home at Bridgeman Downs on Brisbane's northside in April 2003.
Sica, 40, is in custody facing a committal hearing in the Brisbane Magistrate's Court.
His friend Andrea Louise Bowman told the court Sica had spoken to her in the aftermath of the deaths.
"He said, 'I'm going to be done for the murders and when I do, I'm going to blow up the Roma St police headquarters','' she said.
Bowman claimed Sica said he would go on a killing spree, killing more people than the man responsible for the Port Arthur massacre, Martin Bryant, but wouldn't be dumb enough to get caught for it.
"He gets a lot of fan mail in prison,'' Sica allegedly said of Bryant.
Bowman said she also spoke to Sica about a news story where the Singh family had produced a letter from Kunal "beyond the grave" where he "wrote" to his murderer.
"Max scoffed and said, 'why didn't I get one then?''' Bowman said.
She and Sica hypothesised about how the murders had occurred, and Sica said he was on to "the real killer".
"He said, 'I'm going to find them, I'm doing my own investigation'."
The court heard Sica also told Bowman how he'd discovered the three siblings dead in the spa.
Sica told her he'd gone to the house to take them to the movies but when no-one answered, he went inside.
Bowman said Sica told her how he turned off the running tap of the spa, and used a stick to lift blankets off it before a hand popped out.
"I knew it was Sidhi's because it was small,'' Sica allegedly told Bowman.
She said Sica also told her about finding girlfriend Neelma, who appeared to have a gunshot wound in her chest.
Bowman said Sica had told her the siblings' father Vijay was a violent man, and that Neelma was planning to leave as soon as she came into some money.
She claimed Sica said "anyway, they're better off dead".
Bowman also said Sica told her he'd done "all my crying" in the first three days after the siblings were discovered.
The hearing continues.
_______________________________________________________________
Ms Bowman also ALLEGES in court that, Max told her he had a HIT LIST and that she (Bowman) was on THE TOP of this list. BUT it appears she continued seeing him many, many times after.
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
COMMITTAL TUESDAY 21 SEPTEMBER
Singh murders: cop quizzed over text message
September 22, 2010 - 12:00AM
A police officer allegedly forwarded a text message from the mobile phone of a dead woman to his private phone without logging it in police investigation records, a Brisbane court has heard.
Neelma Singh, 24, and her siblings Kunal, 18, and Sidhi, 12, were found dead in the spa at their family's Bridgeman Downs home on Brisbane's northside on April 22, 2003.
Max Sica, who was Neelma's boyfriend in the months before her death, is facing three charges of murder over the deaths and has been in custody since December 2008.
His committal hearing resumed in the Brisbane Magistrates Court yesterday.
The court was told Neelma sent an angry SMS message to a man by the name of Mr Lala saying: "I heard you met Max this week, before you accuse me, get your story straight. You have no right to say what you did".
This afternoon, Sica's defence lawyer Sam Di Carlo asked investigator Detective Senior Sergeant Andrew Massingham why, according to phone records, a police officer involved in the investigation, Detective Senior Constable Philip Heery, had sent the message to his own personal phone in November 2003.
"He was not a forensic officer," Mr Di Carlo said.
Det Sen Sgt Massingham said he did not consider it unusual and was not aware of any reasons for this action.
Mr Di Carlo said the action had not been noted in formal police records.
The court heard that on other occasions, Det Sen Const Heery and other officers had followed "proper procedure" and videotaped and tape-recorded their dealings with the mobile phone in question.
Earlier today, Neelma's Fijian former boyfriend, Jasveer Singh, 27, an accountant who worked for her father's automotive business in Fiji, gave evidence.
The court heard Mr Singh and Neelma had had a sexual relationship and had discussed getting married.
Mr Singh said he had phoned his girlfriend in December 2002 to wish her a happy birthday and, after a short conversation, she said she would phone him back because she was busy.
The court heard that Mr Singh called her five more times that day, but the phone connections dropped out or she didn't answer.
Mr Singh said he received a "polite" phone call, "not aggressive in nature", from Sica telling him that Neelma didn't want to talk to him and revealing his own relationship with Neelma.
"How did this make you feel?" Mr Di Carlo asked.
Mr Singh said: "If she was happy with Max, it was better for me to back out."
Mr Singh and other employees were with Neelma's parents, Shirley and Vijay Singh, in Fiji at about eight (local time) on the night they heard that three bodies had been found at their Brisbane home.
Jasveer Singh told the court he received a phone call about shots fired in Brisbane, but did not have specific recollections of it.
Asked if he had any Fijian friends who had been to Australia or if police had asked him about Neelma cheating on him, or whether officers had ever said they were investigating him as a suspect, he said: "No".
Mr Di Carlo told the court he was not suggesting Jasveer Singh was a suspect, but wanted to know if police had explored this possibility.
The court also heard a recording of a threatening message left on the telephone answering machine of Shirley and Vijay Singh's Brisbane home.
The speaker, a native Fijian, said: "I know where your family lives, Vijay, you f... with my family, I will f... with yours ... I'm going to rape your wife and daughters."
The committal hearing continues tomorrow.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Neelma Singh's ex-boyfriend tells how he 'backed out' of relationship
From: AAP September 21, 2010 4:36PM
THE Fijian former boyfriend of a murdered Brisbane woman has told a court he thought it better to "back out" of their relationship if she'd found happiness with another man.
Neelma Singh, 24, and her siblings Kunal, 18, and Sidhi, 12, were found dead in the spa at their family's Bridgeman Downs home on Brisbane's northside on April 22, 2003.
Max Sica, who was Neelma's boyfriend in the months before her death, is facing three charges of murder over the deaths and has been in custody since December 2008.
His committal hearing resumed in the Brisbane Magistrates Court on Monday after a 10-week adjournment.
Neelma's Fijian former boyfriend, Jasveer Singh, 27, an accountant who worked for her father's automotive business in Fiji, has travelled from his homeland to give evidence at the hearing.
The trip is his first visit to Australia.
The court heard Mr Singh and Neelma had had a sexual relationship and had discussed getting married.
Sica's defence counsel, Sam Di Carlo, asked Mr Singh what he knew about a man called Max.
Mr Singh told the court Neelma had said he was just a friend who was good with computers and had a sports car.
"She never spoke ill of him," he told the court.
Mr Di Carlo asked Mr Singh about phone calls between him and Neelma on December 29, 2002, and a call from Sica.
Mr Singh said he had phoned his girlfriend to wish her a happy birthday and, after a short conversation, she said she would phone him back because she was busy.
"She was happy I called," he said.
The court heard that Mr Singh called her five more times that day, but the phone connections dropped out or she didn't answer.
Mr Singh said he received a "polite" phone call "not aggressive in nature" from Sica telling him that Neelma didn't want to talk to him and revealing his own relationship with Neelma.
"How did this make you feel? ... You were going to marry this girl," Mr Di Carlo asked Jasveer.
Mr Singh said: "If she was happy with Max, it was better for me to back out".
Mr Singh and other employees were with Neelma's parents, Shirley and Vijay Singh, in Fiji at about 8pm (local time), on the night they heard that three bodies had been found at their Brisbane home.
Jasveer Singh told the court he received a phone call about shots fired in Brisbane but did not have specific recollections.
He said there was lots of crying and the Singhs hastily made arrangements to return to Australia.
Asked if he had any Fijian friends who had been to Australia or if police had asked him about Neelma cheating on him, or whether officers had ever said they were investigating him as a suspect, he said: "No".
Mr Di Carlo told the court he was not suggesting Jasveer Singh was a suspect, but wanted to know if police had explored this possibility.
Earlier today, the court heard a recording of a threatening message left on the telephone answering machine of Shirley and Vijay Singh's Brisbane home.
The speaker, a native Fijian, said: "I know where your family lives, Vijay, you f... with my family, I will f... with your's ... I'm going to rape your wife and daughters".
The committal hearing continues.
September 22, 2010 - 12:00AM
A police officer allegedly forwarded a text message from the mobile phone of a dead woman to his private phone without logging it in police investigation records, a Brisbane court has heard.
Neelma Singh, 24, and her siblings Kunal, 18, and Sidhi, 12, were found dead in the spa at their family's Bridgeman Downs home on Brisbane's northside on April 22, 2003.
Max Sica, who was Neelma's boyfriend in the months before her death, is facing three charges of murder over the deaths and has been in custody since December 2008.
His committal hearing resumed in the Brisbane Magistrates Court yesterday.
The court was told Neelma sent an angry SMS message to a man by the name of Mr Lala saying: "I heard you met Max this week, before you accuse me, get your story straight. You have no right to say what you did".
This afternoon, Sica's defence lawyer Sam Di Carlo asked investigator Detective Senior Sergeant Andrew Massingham why, according to phone records, a police officer involved in the investigation, Detective Senior Constable Philip Heery, had sent the message to his own personal phone in November 2003.
"He was not a forensic officer," Mr Di Carlo said.
Det Sen Sgt Massingham said he did not consider it unusual and was not aware of any reasons for this action.
Mr Di Carlo said the action had not been noted in formal police records.
The court heard that on other occasions, Det Sen Const Heery and other officers had followed "proper procedure" and videotaped and tape-recorded their dealings with the mobile phone in question.
Earlier today, Neelma's Fijian former boyfriend, Jasveer Singh, 27, an accountant who worked for her father's automotive business in Fiji, gave evidence.
The court heard Mr Singh and Neelma had had a sexual relationship and had discussed getting married.
Mr Singh said he had phoned his girlfriend in December 2002 to wish her a happy birthday and, after a short conversation, she said she would phone him back because she was busy.
The court heard that Mr Singh called her five more times that day, but the phone connections dropped out or she didn't answer.
Mr Singh said he received a "polite" phone call, "not aggressive in nature", from Sica telling him that Neelma didn't want to talk to him and revealing his own relationship with Neelma.
"How did this make you feel?" Mr Di Carlo asked.
Mr Singh said: "If she was happy with Max, it was better for me to back out."
Mr Singh and other employees were with Neelma's parents, Shirley and Vijay Singh, in Fiji at about eight (local time) on the night they heard that three bodies had been found at their Brisbane home.
Jasveer Singh told the court he received a phone call about shots fired in Brisbane, but did not have specific recollections of it.
Asked if he had any Fijian friends who had been to Australia or if police had asked him about Neelma cheating on him, or whether officers had ever said they were investigating him as a suspect, he said: "No".
Mr Di Carlo told the court he was not suggesting Jasveer Singh was a suspect, but wanted to know if police had explored this possibility.
The court also heard a recording of a threatening message left on the telephone answering machine of Shirley and Vijay Singh's Brisbane home.
The speaker, a native Fijian, said: "I know where your family lives, Vijay, you f... with my family, I will f... with yours ... I'm going to rape your wife and daughters."
The committal hearing continues tomorrow.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Neelma Singh's ex-boyfriend tells how he 'backed out' of relationship
From: AAP September 21, 2010 4:36PM
THE Fijian former boyfriend of a murdered Brisbane woman has told a court he thought it better to "back out" of their relationship if she'd found happiness with another man.
Neelma Singh, 24, and her siblings Kunal, 18, and Sidhi, 12, were found dead in the spa at their family's Bridgeman Downs home on Brisbane's northside on April 22, 2003.
Max Sica, who was Neelma's boyfriend in the months before her death, is facing three charges of murder over the deaths and has been in custody since December 2008.
His committal hearing resumed in the Brisbane Magistrates Court on Monday after a 10-week adjournment.
Neelma's Fijian former boyfriend, Jasveer Singh, 27, an accountant who worked for her father's automotive business in Fiji, has travelled from his homeland to give evidence at the hearing.
The trip is his first visit to Australia.
The court heard Mr Singh and Neelma had had a sexual relationship and had discussed getting married.
Sica's defence counsel, Sam Di Carlo, asked Mr Singh what he knew about a man called Max.
Mr Singh told the court Neelma had said he was just a friend who was good with computers and had a sports car.
"She never spoke ill of him," he told the court.
Mr Di Carlo asked Mr Singh about phone calls between him and Neelma on December 29, 2002, and a call from Sica.
Mr Singh said he had phoned his girlfriend to wish her a happy birthday and, after a short conversation, she said she would phone him back because she was busy.
"She was happy I called," he said.
The court heard that Mr Singh called her five more times that day, but the phone connections dropped out or she didn't answer.
Mr Singh said he received a "polite" phone call "not aggressive in nature" from Sica telling him that Neelma didn't want to talk to him and revealing his own relationship with Neelma.
"How did this make you feel? ... You were going to marry this girl," Mr Di Carlo asked Jasveer.
Mr Singh said: "If she was happy with Max, it was better for me to back out".
Mr Singh and other employees were with Neelma's parents, Shirley and Vijay Singh, in Fiji at about 8pm (local time), on the night they heard that three bodies had been found at their Brisbane home.
Jasveer Singh told the court he received a phone call about shots fired in Brisbane but did not have specific recollections.
He said there was lots of crying and the Singhs hastily made arrangements to return to Australia.
Asked if he had any Fijian friends who had been to Australia or if police had asked him about Neelma cheating on him, or whether officers had ever said they were investigating him as a suspect, he said: "No".
Mr Di Carlo told the court he was not suggesting Jasveer Singh was a suspect, but wanted to know if police had explored this possibility.
Earlier today, the court heard a recording of a threatening message left on the telephone answering machine of Shirley and Vijay Singh's Brisbane home.
The speaker, a native Fijian, said: "I know where your family lives, Vijay, you f... with my family, I will f... with your's ... I'm going to rape your wife and daughters".
The committal hearing continues.
COMMENT MADE .................................
Not too sure. (easiest to say). But I think this guy did it and he / his friend started this blog to create a smokescreen.
To you anonymous, this is only part of the comment made by you. Did not put the rest because it is only a personal attack, with hate and malice. First of all Max nor a friend of his started this blog. Max is in jail and has no access to a computer so you should know that if you would just use some intelligence. This blog only states facts which have come out at the committal hearing so far. Some have been printed in the newspapers and other facts were never printed, so they are here for all to read.
Then what you said about no injuries on his body........is that something you know for a fact? In my opinion it only furthermore shows his innocence, then of course you are entitled to yours. In the meantime you are always welcome to just read on.
To you anonymous, this is only part of the comment made by you. Did not put the rest because it is only a personal attack, with hate and malice. First of all Max nor a friend of his started this blog. Max is in jail and has no access to a computer so you should know that if you would just use some intelligence. This blog only states facts which have come out at the committal hearing so far. Some have been printed in the newspapers and other facts were never printed, so they are here for all to read.
Then what you said about no injuries on his body........is that something you know for a fact? In my opinion it only furthermore shows his innocence, then of course you are entitled to yours. In the meantime you are always welcome to just read on.
Monday, September 20, 2010
COMMITTAL HEARING STARTS AGAIN
Sica defence tells court of angry SMS from Neelma Singh to another man before her death
Petrina Berry From: The Courier-Mail September 20, 2010 8:00PM
AN acrimonious message was sent by Neelma Singh to a man the night before she and her siblings were killed in their Brisbane home, a court has heard.
Neelma, 24, and siblings Kunal, 18, and Sidhi, 12, were found dead in their Bridgeman Downs home, on Brisbane's northside, in April 2003.
Max Sica, Neelma's former boyfriend, is facing three charges of murder over the deaths. His committal hearing resumed in the Brisbane Magistrates Court yesterday after a 10-week adjournment.
Sica's defence counsel, Sam Di Carlo, told the court Neelma sent an angry SMS message to a man by the name of Mr Lala, saying: "Before you accuse me, get your story straight. You have no right to say what you did".
"Then there is a message from him (Mr Lala) the following morning, at 9.55am, which states: 'Can you meet me at the park behind my old house at 10.30am'," Mr Di Carlo said.
"This was almost the last contact, other than with Max Sica, with a person who appears she (Neelma) had some acrimony with in respect of bad-mouthing her around the place and he wants to meet her at 10.30. In the meantime she's dead."
Mr Di Carlo asked investigator Detective Senior Sergeant Andrew Massingham what inquiries police had made into Mr Lala.
Det Sen Sgt Massingham said statements from Mr Lala and his parents were taken and police understood he was at a wedding in bayside Sandgate the night before the Singhs were found dead.
Mr Di Carlo asked what other investigations were conducted into Mr Lala, including finding where he was at the time he replied to Neelma's text message the following morning. Det Sen Sgt Massingham said further inquiries would have been made.
"That inquiry (which mobile tower the message came from) would have been made by the intel (intelligence) office at this time. I don't have any recollection as to which tower it may or may not have bounced off," he said.
Mr Di Carlo told the court: "You (police) may not have been interested in anyone else but Max (Sica)."
Earlier in the day, the court heard an accusation that the children's mother, Shirley Singh, was having an affair with a younger man.
Psychic reader Helen Hextall told the court about the many conversations she had with Ms Singh before the murders.
She said Ms Singh had spoken of her affair with an Australian man 10 years her junior.
"She asked me if I thought he was a player," Ms Hextall said.
The hearing resumes on Tuesday.
Petrina Berry From: The Courier-Mail September 20, 2010 8:00PM
AN acrimonious message was sent by Neelma Singh to a man the night before she and her siblings were killed in their Brisbane home, a court has heard.
Neelma, 24, and siblings Kunal, 18, and Sidhi, 12, were found dead in their Bridgeman Downs home, on Brisbane's northside, in April 2003.
Max Sica, Neelma's former boyfriend, is facing three charges of murder over the deaths. His committal hearing resumed in the Brisbane Magistrates Court yesterday after a 10-week adjournment.
Sica's defence counsel, Sam Di Carlo, told the court Neelma sent an angry SMS message to a man by the name of Mr Lala, saying: "Before you accuse me, get your story straight. You have no right to say what you did".
"Then there is a message from him (Mr Lala) the following morning, at 9.55am, which states: 'Can you meet me at the park behind my old house at 10.30am'," Mr Di Carlo said.
"This was almost the last contact, other than with Max Sica, with a person who appears she (Neelma) had some acrimony with in respect of bad-mouthing her around the place and he wants to meet her at 10.30. In the meantime she's dead."
Mr Di Carlo asked investigator Detective Senior Sergeant Andrew Massingham what inquiries police had made into Mr Lala.
Det Sen Sgt Massingham said statements from Mr Lala and his parents were taken and police understood he was at a wedding in bayside Sandgate the night before the Singhs were found dead.
Mr Di Carlo asked what other investigations were conducted into Mr Lala, including finding where he was at the time he replied to Neelma's text message the following morning. Det Sen Sgt Massingham said further inquiries would have been made.
"That inquiry (which mobile tower the message came from) would have been made by the intel (intelligence) office at this time. I don't have any recollection as to which tower it may or may not have bounced off," he said.
Mr Di Carlo told the court: "You (police) may not have been interested in anyone else but Max (Sica)."
Earlier in the day, the court heard an accusation that the children's mother, Shirley Singh, was having an affair with a younger man.
Psychic reader Helen Hextall told the court about the many conversations she had with Ms Singh before the murders.
She said Ms Singh had spoken of her affair with an Australian man 10 years her junior.
"She asked me if I thought he was a player," Ms Hextall said.
The hearing resumes on Tuesday.
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
BLOW TO CROWN CASE
For five and a half years police have worked on the Singh murders. This operation has been described as the most complex and largest investigation in QLD history.
On Monday 21/04/03 Max went and picked up his two children, (12 and 5 yrs of age) and took them to Mcdonalds for breakfast. They went through the drive through between 7.15-7.30am, before going to Ironbark Gully Park. The police siezed camera surveillence from Mcdonalds, within two days from the inside of the restaurant. At 7.05am a man, woman, girl and boy entered the restaurant. They are the very first customers. The man appears to have black hair and looks similar to Max. The man is wearing shorts, a white t-shirt, sandals and watch on his wrist. The young boy has a healthy built and the young girl has long hair reaching below her shoulders, with a bandana on her head. The police believe that this footage was of Max and his children. "Watch" was a main part of the investigation. I guess they thought what any normal person would do, perhaps Max got rid of the watch or got it repaired because he had DNA, BLOOD OR EVIDENCE of water from the spa bath or any other forensic material in it. They even questioned members of the family about it during the CMC hearing in 2006.
Today, a witness, a mother identified the children on the footage as not hers. Max`s daughter who was five at the time had short, ear length (bob)style hair cut. She never wore a bandana. Her record of interview with police on the 23rd of April 2003 shows her hairstyle. The male in the footage appears fuller (chubbier) than Max. The ex-wife couldnt identify Max or her son on the footage either. It doesnt matter to the police what Max or his family has said in their record of interviews. Even Max`s family knew that the footage was not of Max and the children.
As seen on SBS on (every family`s nightmare) last week, its clear that the qld police has chosen the "normative" method rather than the eliminative. They made up their mind from the word go (22/04/03 when Max`s home was described as a secondary crime scene) that Max was responsible for the murders and spent six years building the case around him. (there is evidence of witnesses including a major witness for the crown case, who is yet to come to build up more circumstantial evidence for the investigation, after Max had been charged for the murders in late 2008). But we must give credit to the QLD police because they did use the eliminative method in the end, only to eliminate everyone else and focus their entire cirumstantial evidence on Max Sica. Amazing how they never found any shred of DNA, BLOOD, or any other form of evidence against Max, despite his items (from the Sica house) being siezed on the early hours of the 23rd of April 03, prior to which Max had spent roughly 18 hours in police custody.
The police even had the chance to corrobrate Max`s items of clothing over the weekend, but never even bothered to ask anybody what Max had been wearing on days prior to the discovery.
Neelma`s ex boyfriend (who also exchanged sms messages between Sunday and Monday morning with Neelma) also said he was in bed between 12 and 630am. Police chose to believe him (and his family) yet claim they used the eliminative system from the start, trying to keep an "open mind". They never showed anybody the vehicle or the photoboard of her ex boyfriend or anyone else as has been done to Max. They never believed Max or his family when they individualy testified (while Max was being interviewed by the police just after the discovery of the bodies) to max being asleep at home. This is despite Max`s brother telling them that he checked on Max that night to discuss something with him and saw that he was in bed asleep.(he did this after he had dropped off a family friend back to her house after she had spent the night with him at the Sica residence) This happened after midnight on the 20th of April 03 `the night the police allege the murders had occured'. There are so many examples that can be given about the crime case that really does not make much sense. Maybe thats why they dont want to tell the defence what their case actually is, ie: what they are alleging occured on the night of the "DEATHS".
On one hand, its a premeditated approach, on the other (a spur of the moment), (a crime of passion) approach. They have circumstantial theories to back both avenues up. Its clear to even a blind person that the police have used a normative approach in this investigation. They dont care if Max is innocent, for them who better than an ex criminal, especially one that was involved in burning down a police station???. They just want their promotion, and to keep a face in front of society. They all seem to have forgotten the pledge they took of honesty and integrity, and the faith that the public have in them for truth and justice.
I guess unless you feel the entire weight of the injustice from these very people in whom you place your trust in, you will never know what it means to feel "EVERY FAMILY`S NIGHTMARE". Please do watch for the sex charges to go to trial as the injustice in that case and the normitive way in which the police formed their crown case against Max will be exposed with CRUTIAL evidence which the police would have known if they ever bothered to ask any members of the family, and really it would have helped the crown in their case as at that time none of the Sica family members knew the details about the allegation.
I bet you anything that when the crowns major witness Mrs Bowman, is called to testify, that at least one member of the media will be present to report on it.
As for us we believe in a higher authority beyond this world, we believe in the one and only true God to whom we pray for justice in this matter for the sakes of Neelma, Kunal, Sidhi and Max.
On Monday 21/04/03 Max went and picked up his two children, (12 and 5 yrs of age) and took them to Mcdonalds for breakfast. They went through the drive through between 7.15-7.30am, before going to Ironbark Gully Park. The police siezed camera surveillence from Mcdonalds, within two days from the inside of the restaurant. At 7.05am a man, woman, girl and boy entered the restaurant. They are the very first customers. The man appears to have black hair and looks similar to Max. The man is wearing shorts, a white t-shirt, sandals and watch on his wrist. The young boy has a healthy built and the young girl has long hair reaching below her shoulders, with a bandana on her head. The police believe that this footage was of Max and his children. "Watch" was a main part of the investigation. I guess they thought what any normal person would do, perhaps Max got rid of the watch or got it repaired because he had DNA, BLOOD OR EVIDENCE of water from the spa bath or any other forensic material in it. They even questioned members of the family about it during the CMC hearing in 2006.
Today, a witness, a mother identified the children on the footage as not hers. Max`s daughter who was five at the time had short, ear length (bob)style hair cut. She never wore a bandana. Her record of interview with police on the 23rd of April 2003 shows her hairstyle. The male in the footage appears fuller (chubbier) than Max. The ex-wife couldnt identify Max or her son on the footage either. It doesnt matter to the police what Max or his family has said in their record of interviews. Even Max`s family knew that the footage was not of Max and the children.
As seen on SBS on (every family`s nightmare) last week, its clear that the qld police has chosen the "normative" method rather than the eliminative. They made up their mind from the word go (22/04/03 when Max`s home was described as a secondary crime scene) that Max was responsible for the murders and spent six years building the case around him. (there is evidence of witnesses including a major witness for the crown case, who is yet to come to build up more circumstantial evidence for the investigation, after Max had been charged for the murders in late 2008). But we must give credit to the QLD police because they did use the eliminative method in the end, only to eliminate everyone else and focus their entire cirumstantial evidence on Max Sica. Amazing how they never found any shred of DNA, BLOOD, or any other form of evidence against Max, despite his items (from the Sica house) being siezed on the early hours of the 23rd of April 03, prior to which Max had spent roughly 18 hours in police custody.
The police even had the chance to corrobrate Max`s items of clothing over the weekend, but never even bothered to ask anybody what Max had been wearing on days prior to the discovery.
Neelma`s ex boyfriend (who also exchanged sms messages between Sunday and Monday morning with Neelma) also said he was in bed between 12 and 630am. Police chose to believe him (and his family) yet claim they used the eliminative system from the start, trying to keep an "open mind". They never showed anybody the vehicle or the photoboard of her ex boyfriend or anyone else as has been done to Max. They never believed Max or his family when they individualy testified (while Max was being interviewed by the police just after the discovery of the bodies) to max being asleep at home. This is despite Max`s brother telling them that he checked on Max that night to discuss something with him and saw that he was in bed asleep.(he did this after he had dropped off a family friend back to her house after she had spent the night with him at the Sica residence) This happened after midnight on the 20th of April 03 `the night the police allege the murders had occured'. There are so many examples that can be given about the crime case that really does not make much sense. Maybe thats why they dont want to tell the defence what their case actually is, ie: what they are alleging occured on the night of the "DEATHS".
On one hand, its a premeditated approach, on the other (a spur of the moment), (a crime of passion) approach. They have circumstantial theories to back both avenues up. Its clear to even a blind person that the police have used a normative approach in this investigation. They dont care if Max is innocent, for them who better than an ex criminal, especially one that was involved in burning down a police station???. They just want their promotion, and to keep a face in front of society. They all seem to have forgotten the pledge they took of honesty and integrity, and the faith that the public have in them for truth and justice.
I guess unless you feel the entire weight of the injustice from these very people in whom you place your trust in, you will never know what it means to feel "EVERY FAMILY`S NIGHTMARE". Please do watch for the sex charges to go to trial as the injustice in that case and the normitive way in which the police formed their crown case against Max will be exposed with CRUTIAL evidence which the police would have known if they ever bothered to ask any members of the family, and really it would have helped the crown in their case as at that time none of the Sica family members knew the details about the allegation.
I bet you anything that when the crowns major witness Mrs Bowman, is called to testify, that at least one member of the media will be present to report on it.
As for us we believe in a higher authority beyond this world, we believe in the one and only true God to whom we pray for justice in this matter for the sakes of Neelma, Kunal, Sidhi and Max.
Thursday, May 6, 2010
INVESTIGATOR CREEPED OUT BY SICA
Investigator 'creeped out' by Sica AMELIA BENTLEY
May 5, 2010 - 6:18AM
Accused killer Max Sica allegedly held his victim's hand as she lay dead in a spa bath, a Brisbane court has heard.
In the continuation of a committal hearing for Mr Sica, accused of the brutal slaying of his on-and-off girlfriend Neelma, 24, her 18-year-old brother Kunal and 12-year-sister Sidhi Singh seven years ago, Brisbane Magistrates Court yesterday heard evidence from a private investigator involved in the murder inquiry.
Brenda Sanche, who met with Mr Sica several times after the suburban killings, told detectives investigating the murders she became "creeped out" by Mr Sica who she believed was "obsessed" with the exact time of the Singhs' deaths and why their bodies were dumped in a hot spa bath.
Sica case in turmoil as lawyer demands cash
Sica 'forced into small socks'
Ms Sanche, who was not present in court but whose evidence was played via a recorded interview with police, said Mr Sica told her how he discovered the bodies of the Singhs when he let himself in to their home through an open garage door in April 2003.
He told her how, after seeing the bodies in the spa, he had held Neelma's hand before emergency services arrived at the crime scene in Grass Tree Close, Bridgeman Downs, in Brisbane's north.
Ms Sanche said she found that piece of information "really weird" and said she "thought he was lying" about parts of his story after she studied his body language.
After having coffee with Mr Sica several times in the months following the killings, Ms Sanche said she was "creeped out".
"I was feeling kinda creeped out about Max. Just things he said ... every conversation we had he wanted to know the time of death ... he was obsessed with the time of death," she said.
Mr Sica also was fixated on the security system installed at the Singhs' home, telling Ms Sanche the system had "laser beams" which could detect people in the home.
He also continually spoke about how the bodies had been left in hot water, saying: "Everybody knows it's cold water that gets rid of evidence".
But Ms Sanche said she did not think Mr Sica believed that statement, saying she thought he would have known it was hot water rather than cold which could wash away evidence.
Ms Sanche said an associate named Greg had told her Mr Sica had "looked into my eyes and said he didn't do this" and Greg believed him.
"He's telling me to believe him, but things just didn't make sense in my head," she said.
Following a five-and-a-half-year investigation into the Singh murders, Mr Sica was arrested and charged the murders of the Singh siblings.
The 40-year-old father of three from Stafford Heights, in Brisbane's north, denies the charges.
Since his arrest in November 2008 and following two failed applications for bail, Mr Sica has been in jail on remand awaiting the outcome of a trial.
The committal hearing, in which Magistrate Brian Hine will determine if there is enough evidence for the case to proceed to trial, continues today.
OBSESSED WITH SINGH`S TIME OF DEATH AND WHY BODIES WERE DUMPED IN HOT SPA BATH.... Max Sica was devestated at finding Neelma, Kunal and Sidhi dead in a spa. He as much as anyone wanted to know who did this. The police when interviewing him the first time had asked him who he thought had done it, he replied how would i know, but if i did, pray i dont get to them first. He then told the investigating officer i did not do this if that`s what your thinking. Then he soon came to realize that he was their prime suspect.
As for Ms Sanche, the so called investigator, she was on her first job when she met Max and was an understudy for the actual real investigator, Greg, the person she says was an associate. Ms Sanche at that stage had no qualifications whatsoever to be an investigator let alone analysing someones body language. But like everything else about this case, each and all are entitled to have their say about what they assume, what they allege and what they then acutally know.
May 5, 2010 - 6:18AM
Accused killer Max Sica allegedly held his victim's hand as she lay dead in a spa bath, a Brisbane court has heard.
In the continuation of a committal hearing for Mr Sica, accused of the brutal slaying of his on-and-off girlfriend Neelma, 24, her 18-year-old brother Kunal and 12-year-sister Sidhi Singh seven years ago, Brisbane Magistrates Court yesterday heard evidence from a private investigator involved in the murder inquiry.
Brenda Sanche, who met with Mr Sica several times after the suburban killings, told detectives investigating the murders she became "creeped out" by Mr Sica who she believed was "obsessed" with the exact time of the Singhs' deaths and why their bodies were dumped in a hot spa bath.
Sica case in turmoil as lawyer demands cash
Sica 'forced into small socks'
Ms Sanche, who was not present in court but whose evidence was played via a recorded interview with police, said Mr Sica told her how he discovered the bodies of the Singhs when he let himself in to their home through an open garage door in April 2003.
He told her how, after seeing the bodies in the spa, he had held Neelma's hand before emergency services arrived at the crime scene in Grass Tree Close, Bridgeman Downs, in Brisbane's north.
Ms Sanche said she found that piece of information "really weird" and said she "thought he was lying" about parts of his story after she studied his body language.
After having coffee with Mr Sica several times in the months following the killings, Ms Sanche said she was "creeped out".
"I was feeling kinda creeped out about Max. Just things he said ... every conversation we had he wanted to know the time of death ... he was obsessed with the time of death," she said.
Mr Sica also was fixated on the security system installed at the Singhs' home, telling Ms Sanche the system had "laser beams" which could detect people in the home.
He also continually spoke about how the bodies had been left in hot water, saying: "Everybody knows it's cold water that gets rid of evidence".
But Ms Sanche said she did not think Mr Sica believed that statement, saying she thought he would have known it was hot water rather than cold which could wash away evidence.
Ms Sanche said an associate named Greg had told her Mr Sica had "looked into my eyes and said he didn't do this" and Greg believed him.
"He's telling me to believe him, but things just didn't make sense in my head," she said.
Following a five-and-a-half-year investigation into the Singh murders, Mr Sica was arrested and charged the murders of the Singh siblings.
The 40-year-old father of three from Stafford Heights, in Brisbane's north, denies the charges.
Since his arrest in November 2008 and following two failed applications for bail, Mr Sica has been in jail on remand awaiting the outcome of a trial.
The committal hearing, in which Magistrate Brian Hine will determine if there is enough evidence for the case to proceed to trial, continues today.
OBSESSED WITH SINGH`S TIME OF DEATH AND WHY BODIES WERE DUMPED IN HOT SPA BATH.... Max Sica was devestated at finding Neelma, Kunal and Sidhi dead in a spa. He as much as anyone wanted to know who did this. The police when interviewing him the first time had asked him who he thought had done it, he replied how would i know, but if i did, pray i dont get to them first. He then told the investigating officer i did not do this if that`s what your thinking. Then he soon came to realize that he was their prime suspect.
As for Ms Sanche, the so called investigator, she was on her first job when she met Max and was an understudy for the actual real investigator, Greg, the person she says was an associate. Ms Sanche at that stage had no qualifications whatsoever to be an investigator let alone analysing someones body language. But like everything else about this case, each and all are entitled to have their say about what they assume, what they allege and what they then acutally know.
BLEACHED FEET ARTICLE
Bleached feet used in murder investigation
AMELIA BENTLEY April 30, 2010
Police officers dipped their feet in bleach solutions and walked on carpet samples while investigating the murders of the Singh siblings at their north Brisbane home seven years ago, a court has been told.
Former flight attendant Neelma, 24, student Kunal, 18 and 12-year-old Sidhi Singh were found slain in their Bridgeman Downs home in April 2003, while their parents were away in Fiji.
Neelma's on-and-off boyfriend, former neighbour Max Sica, now 40, was charged with their murders in late 2008 following a five year investigation into the grisly killings.
------------------------
Sica 'forced into small socks'
------------------------
Yesterday during Mr Sica's committal hearing, the Brisbane Magistrates Court was told the police experiment was done in order to mimic the Singhs' killer, who police allege left bleach-stained foot prints on carpet at the murder scene.
Police have alleged Mr Sica used bleach to clean part of the Singhs' home after he strangled Neelma, bashed and then drowned Kunal and bludgeoned Sidhi to death.
Yesterday afternoon, defence barrister Sam Di Carlo questioned scientist Richard Mattner, who discovered bleach traces on several items taken from the Singhs home following the discovery of the siblings' bodies.
Mr Mattner said he remembered police officers involved in the investigation soaked their feet in buckets of bleach solutions and walked up and down carpets in order to re-create footprints found at the murder scene.
"Initially, it was hoped to simulate footprints on carpet. It was bare feet ... I believe it was quite unsuccessful," he said.
Mr Mattner said he remembered police were "disappointed with the results" because they had been unable to make a path of footprints like the ones discovered at the Grass Tree Close home.
"I suggested a way to produce more footprints was to put a pair of socks on," he said.
Mr Mattner denied police pressured him to make particular findings about footprints in bleach on carpet.
But he said it was true he emailed a colleague in July 2003 regarding the Singh murders investigation, which said: "The detectives say the evidence is critical since they don't have much to hang their hats on".
Mr Mattner said he had been referring to "confirmatory tests" to double-check his work.
"This was an important case, clearly," he said.
Carpet from vehicles used by Mr Sica around the time of the killings was also tested for bleach traces, Mr Mattner said.
There were areas which, to the naked eye, appeared as though bleach had come in contact.
But back at his laboratory, Mr Mattner said he found no evidence of bleach product.
The committal hearing, which began in August last year and was adjourned several times before resuming earlier this month, continues today.
YES AND THIS PROVES WHAT? JUST MORE ASSUMPTIONS, ALLEGATIONS AND INUENDO`S
AMELIA BENTLEY April 30, 2010
Police officers dipped their feet in bleach solutions and walked on carpet samples while investigating the murders of the Singh siblings at their north Brisbane home seven years ago, a court has been told.
Former flight attendant Neelma, 24, student Kunal, 18 and 12-year-old Sidhi Singh were found slain in their Bridgeman Downs home in April 2003, while their parents were away in Fiji.
Neelma's on-and-off boyfriend, former neighbour Max Sica, now 40, was charged with their murders in late 2008 following a five year investigation into the grisly killings.
------------------------
Sica 'forced into small socks'
------------------------
Yesterday during Mr Sica's committal hearing, the Brisbane Magistrates Court was told the police experiment was done in order to mimic the Singhs' killer, who police allege left bleach-stained foot prints on carpet at the murder scene.
Police have alleged Mr Sica used bleach to clean part of the Singhs' home after he strangled Neelma, bashed and then drowned Kunal and bludgeoned Sidhi to death.
Yesterday afternoon, defence barrister Sam Di Carlo questioned scientist Richard Mattner, who discovered bleach traces on several items taken from the Singhs home following the discovery of the siblings' bodies.
Mr Mattner said he remembered police officers involved in the investigation soaked their feet in buckets of bleach solutions and walked up and down carpets in order to re-create footprints found at the murder scene.
"Initially, it was hoped to simulate footprints on carpet. It was bare feet ... I believe it was quite unsuccessful," he said.
Mr Mattner said he remembered police were "disappointed with the results" because they had been unable to make a path of footprints like the ones discovered at the Grass Tree Close home.
"I suggested a way to produce more footprints was to put a pair of socks on," he said.
Mr Mattner denied police pressured him to make particular findings about footprints in bleach on carpet.
But he said it was true he emailed a colleague in July 2003 regarding the Singh murders investigation, which said: "The detectives say the evidence is critical since they don't have much to hang their hats on".
Mr Mattner said he had been referring to "confirmatory tests" to double-check his work.
"This was an important case, clearly," he said.
Carpet from vehicles used by Mr Sica around the time of the killings was also tested for bleach traces, Mr Mattner said.
There were areas which, to the naked eye, appeared as though bleach had come in contact.
But back at his laboratory, Mr Mattner said he found no evidence of bleach product.
The committal hearing, which began in August last year and was adjourned several times before resuming earlier this month, continues today.
YES AND THIS PROVES WHAT? JUST MORE ASSUMPTIONS, ALLEGATIONS AND INUENDO`S
Friday, April 30, 2010
AMAZING BUT TRUE
Yesterday at the committal hearing an amazing thing was said, it was said that after seven yrs, police had only just now sent Max Sica`s clothes and socks to be tested for bleach. First of all i really cant believe it, I cant believe they took seven yrs to do it, and i cant believe they are just taking samples now. What is happening? Something is definately not right.
Six days to discover footprints, seven years to take bleach samples, garden fork that allegedly was used to kill Singh children found after five days when on the day of the discovery of the bodies, there had been more than thirty officers and forensic people through the Singh home to search in every corner.
In a case as huge as this and with a man fighting for the truth and his freedom, where is the justice? As soon as the committal is finished, there will be some facts posted to this blog. It all sounds astounding, unbelievable but unfortunately everything that has been happening in this case and to Max Sica is all too true.
Six days to discover footprints, seven years to take bleach samples, garden fork that allegedly was used to kill Singh children found after five days when on the day of the discovery of the bodies, there had been more than thirty officers and forensic people through the Singh home to search in every corner.
In a case as huge as this and with a man fighting for the truth and his freedom, where is the justice? As soon as the committal is finished, there will be some facts posted to this blog. It all sounds astounding, unbelievable but unfortunately everything that has been happening in this case and to Max Sica is all too true.
Monday, April 19, 2010
STAY TUNED
How does a person go from being a witness, to a prime suspect within less than 24 hours? Bryne Paton, the investigation coordinator has given his testimony and his explanation for it, along with the lead detective Mr Joseph Vincent Zitny. Stay tuned for the next update.........it'll really make u think.
Answer to comment.... No resemblence between two whatsoever, thats why you have not heard any comment on it.
Answer to comment.... No resemblence between two whatsoever, thats why you have not heard any comment on it.
Sunday, April 11, 2010
COMMON SENSE
Before reading the statement made below consider two facts:
1. The girl in question up until oct 2008 was a virgin. This proved by the states own doctors.
2. Police had max under surveillance for five yrs, so either max was the best at evading more than 47 police officers or they point blanked lied.
Use your brains. If you believe that max was the best then sack the government and police for being so incompetent.
If you believe in the latter that police lied, (corrupted and perverted justice) then sack the government and police and worry for your future and that of your children.
PIECE OF A PARTIAL STATMENT
ALLEGATIONS. The word itself says it all. An "allegation" is what a person SAYS happened, but not what really happened. Thats why a number of people from the public is quick to jump at and decide a persons guilt from these "so-called" allegations, because to any ordinary person, when the police lay charges against someone, they immediately trust and believe that the police have fully investigated the matter and that they (police) are members of the law that can be trusted without question.
It is so unfortunate that we are unable to bring out the truth about the complainant child's allegations, as we do not want to give the child a chance to change her stories again. That's right, again. The child first told everyone that the offences would occur while people would be in the house, sometimes up to 5 other people, and that it would take place in all the rooms of the Sica residence, however when confronted by someone in front of two other witnesses, (one of which was the complainant child's mother) the child changed her stories. Initially she had said that the offences would occur in maxs room, however when this person told her that max had his room under video surveillance, she quickly said that it never happened in maxs room. The person then told her that all the other rooms of the house was under audio surveillance and that they'd be able to hear things. She then turned around and said that they never spoke about it, to which the person got frustrated and asked her, if they used sign language.
The police themselves who was investigating, following and surveilling Max (since 2003 for the triple murders with the states finest officers assigned to the case )admitted that there was no evidence to suggest that these offences had occurred. The child also told members of her family, the sica family and the family children that her friend (chloe-real names ommitted for legal issues) was drugged, raped and beaten by her friends mother's boyfriend and that she was pregnant. This story started in feb/march of 2008, yet some 6 months later when questioned by police, Chloe, the friend of the complainant child told the police that it never really happened and that it was all a DREAM that she had. Regarding the assault allegations, nothing came out of it as the police said that there had been "alibi witnesses".
Amazing how the police never once questioned any members of the sica family, including max's wife and children from the family. This is despite the fact that carlo sica, max's father, (the person who informed the police about the disclosures that the complainant child had made) AND ALSO A CROWN WITNESS told the police that max's partner was always with max everyday, like a leech. The complainant child herself told the police that after and before some of these offences, they had met up with other people in the family, including maxs partner. I wonder why they didn't even bother to go and confirm whether or not that really was the case.
It's just so unfortunate that we are unable to give examples as this will give the child a chance to change her stories once more.. Here's another one. The child started high school in 2008, she had a friend in primary school that she used to call her ''sister'' and her other half, someone that she knew for 3 years. She never once told her best friend about any of these allegations, yet opened up to more than 5 girls that she only knew for less than 6 months. The funny part is, those other girls themselves said they find it difficult to believe the complainant child as she has a habit of telling lies about everything and everyone. The police also knows that the child and her friends lied about a call that they alleged was made by max sica to the complainant child during school hours in november 2008, (shortly after max was granted bail over the sex charges) which they claim to have lasted over 30 mins. The phone records showed that the child did not recieve any such call and neither did her friends, and we all know that phone records don't lie.
Here's a real mind boggler........the complianant child alleged that an offence occurred in 2007, 5 days after her friend kim's birthday. (real names not provided due to legal reasons) kim, told the police herself that she did know the complainant child until 2008, when they started high school together. Even if u give the child the benefit of the doubt and say that it could have occured 5 days after her friends kim's birthday in 2008, things do not add up, as during that day in 2008, (which equates to be a tuesday) the complainant child's mother watched her daughter at her house as she was no longer working weekdays by then. It's a real pity that the complainant child's mother has not read the details of the allegations, because if she did, she herself would realise that her daughter has lied immensely.
The police did not take the child for a medical examination until after 6 weeks, after constant pressure from maxs parents, the child was taken to a medical center for examination by a gp. The gp told the court under cross examiantion in commital, that she did NOT examine the child's hymen at all after speaking to the sexual assault unit over the phone who advised her not to carry out the examination. She only took a specimen to check for bacteria culture and to look for urine infection. She HERSELF, from her own mouth told the court that she never once said that the child was not a virgin, as she did not examine her for that. however, when the complainant child went to the specialist, she told her that the other gp had said that she was definetely not a virgin. Even the mother of the complainant child said that the doctor said that "she thought that penetration had occurred", however the gp said that she never said that. how could she, when she did not examine the girls hymen??? even the specialist said that the childs hymen was fully intact, thick, and without any injury or abnormalities. (which is normally present in sexually active girls, especially if sex is occurring at least once a fortnight for 4 years) this piece of evidence is mind boggling too, especially if u consider the fact that the child herself told the police that "it hurt" her so bad on nearly every occasion they had sex and that sometimes it hurt her for days after as well, to the point where she would "whimper" and "cry" after urinating............wierd isn't it?
The most disgusting fact about the police is that they did not even bother to question anybody at all. don't they have a duty of care towards children?? How come they never questioned max's daughter, niece, son, and partner's brother??? (all of whom are ALIBI WITNESSES), the police would have known this if they had bothered to investigate everything properly. What if max had been molesting other children in the family??? what would the police say if this had turned out to be the case? where does their duty of care lie....I wonder. They did not attempt to question max's partner until the day they charged max with the allegations. After max was arrested and taken away by police, 2 female officers approached his partner and asked if she was willing to talk to the police, naturally, anybody that has common sense will know (and ask any lawyer) that once a person is charged, it is futile for ALIBI witnesses to talk to the police. The sadest part is, max's wife was always willing to talk to police if they had approached her, prior to arresting max. and it would have been better for the police case, as at that time the defense did not know the details of the allegations. If the police had simply asked a question such as "do u recall the night that ............................ and ...................?" (in due time all the evidence of the defense will fill in the gaps) that would have been enough to find out the truth. They did it in the complainant child's friends' case, i wonder why they didnt do that in max's. But i must give the police credit for "attempting" to talk to max's wife's younger brother. They went to the wrong address......this is ironic as shiv's (max's wife) parents have always rented, and tenancy information is readily available to police.
This case was the reason why the police ended up jumping the gun and charging max with triple murder. Max got charged with the sex allegations in late october, got bail 2 weeks later in mid of november, and arrested with triple murder a week after he got married in december to his partner for 5 years. The police knew that the child had lied but it was too late for them, as they couldn't have max get off the sex charges as it would prove to the public just how badly the police wanted him for the murders.
The lead detectives in the sex case was liasing with the lead detectives (mr zitny, homicide squad) from the murder investigation. Ironic part is, that mr zitny was working for the child protection unit in pine rivers that same year. This is the officer who denied under oath that max was a prime suspect in the triple murder. He had said that max was only ever a "person of interest" and that he didn't become the prime suspect in the killings until an year later, which was disproved with documentation which showed that max was a prime suspect in the killings within less than 12 hours of the discovery of the bodies. This is one of the reasons why max's family is fighting for max's bail so strongly, because they all were told by many lawyers to expect an arrest for the murders as the police will not want to look stupid in front of the public, and this way they could get him for one or the other set of charges. oh, did i forget to mention that 2 of the 20 sex charges alones carries 2 life sentences, which means, if convicted, max would be spending a minimum of 20 to 30 years behind prison? Just wait and see, the sex trial will occur early next year before the complainant child reaches the age of 16 and is able to be cross examined as an adult. It is a real pity that the police didnt do their job properly, as once the trial begins, they will look like real fools, especially when the alibi witnesses for the days in question are presented. Not only that, the alibi witnesses have got evidence to back up their witness testimonies, eg phone records, bank statements, photos, videos, passports, school records, POLICE records and many more will prove the extent to which the complainant child has lied and the lack of proper police investigation in this matter.
The police did not speak to many of the crown witnesses( child's friends, etc) until after max was arrested with the allegations. I pray that anyone that has commonsense can now understand the legal politics which surrounds the murder charges, moreso, due to the fact that police shot themselves in the foot when they jumped the gun and charged max with the murders when they realised that the child's story didnt add up........maybe thats why they didnt even bother to question any of the sica family members, because they knew that then, they (the police) will not be able to say in the end that they knew both sides of the story.
The police have always tried to taint max's name through trial by media, and what better opportunity then when a child is involved? please do not take our word for it, just wait until the trial starts and when the defense produces it's evidence. the family will naturally then come out to the media with the entire evidence, including a really long list of alibi witnesses, most of which are children. Think about it, the police was thorough in Chloe`s case and questioned people (from suspects side) to establish the childs creditability. I wonder why they never did that in max SICA`S CASE. They did not attempt to question the defences main alibi witnesses (which is common police practice) until after Max got charged.
Anyone that reads this, if u really are a person of truth and integrity, please pray that god shows the truth in this matter for both the sake of the complainant child (someone who max and shiv treated as if their own child) and for max, Amen. Mark my words, max will get vindicated by god, who knows and sees all, and if this does not come to pass, u can spit on our faces. Thats how much evidence the defense has, and guess what, it's really not evidence at all, its the TRUTH. and if it wasnt, then everyone apart from the complainant child is telling the truth, including people who don't know max personally but will be able to provide alibi witness testimony.
Watch the trial it will be very very enlighting and entertaining (because a circus will be made out of the legal system) and it will prove the many fundamental flaws in the QLD governement and QLD police system which has been seen from the Fitzgerald Inquiry right up until today. For example, the Graham Stafford case, Lindy Chamberlain case, Millard case just to name a few. Now Max Sica, who is going to be the man for this century.
1. The girl in question up until oct 2008 was a virgin. This proved by the states own doctors.
2. Police had max under surveillance for five yrs, so either max was the best at evading more than 47 police officers or they point blanked lied.
Use your brains. If you believe that max was the best then sack the government and police for being so incompetent.
If you believe in the latter that police lied, (corrupted and perverted justice) then sack the government and police and worry for your future and that of your children.
PIECE OF A PARTIAL STATMENT
ALLEGATIONS. The word itself says it all. An "allegation" is what a person SAYS happened, but not what really happened. Thats why a number of people from the public is quick to jump at and decide a persons guilt from these "so-called" allegations, because to any ordinary person, when the police lay charges against someone, they immediately trust and believe that the police have fully investigated the matter and that they (police) are members of the law that can be trusted without question.
It is so unfortunate that we are unable to bring out the truth about the complainant child's allegations, as we do not want to give the child a chance to change her stories again. That's right, again. The child first told everyone that the offences would occur while people would be in the house, sometimes up to 5 other people, and that it would take place in all the rooms of the Sica residence, however when confronted by someone in front of two other witnesses, (one of which was the complainant child's mother) the child changed her stories. Initially she had said that the offences would occur in maxs room, however when this person told her that max had his room under video surveillance, she quickly said that it never happened in maxs room. The person then told her that all the other rooms of the house was under audio surveillance and that they'd be able to hear things. She then turned around and said that they never spoke about it, to which the person got frustrated and asked her, if they used sign language.
The police themselves who was investigating, following and surveilling Max (since 2003 for the triple murders with the states finest officers assigned to the case )admitted that there was no evidence to suggest that these offences had occurred. The child also told members of her family, the sica family and the family children that her friend (chloe-real names ommitted for legal issues) was drugged, raped and beaten by her friends mother's boyfriend and that she was pregnant. This story started in feb/march of 2008, yet some 6 months later when questioned by police, Chloe, the friend of the complainant child told the police that it never really happened and that it was all a DREAM that she had. Regarding the assault allegations, nothing came out of it as the police said that there had been "alibi witnesses".
Amazing how the police never once questioned any members of the sica family, including max's wife and children from the family. This is despite the fact that carlo sica, max's father, (the person who informed the police about the disclosures that the complainant child had made) AND ALSO A CROWN WITNESS told the police that max's partner was always with max everyday, like a leech. The complainant child herself told the police that after and before some of these offences, they had met up with other people in the family, including maxs partner. I wonder why they didn't even bother to go and confirm whether or not that really was the case.
It's just so unfortunate that we are unable to give examples as this will give the child a chance to change her stories once more.. Here's another one. The child started high school in 2008, she had a friend in primary school that she used to call her ''sister'' and her other half, someone that she knew for 3 years. She never once told her best friend about any of these allegations, yet opened up to more than 5 girls that she only knew for less than 6 months. The funny part is, those other girls themselves said they find it difficult to believe the complainant child as she has a habit of telling lies about everything and everyone. The police also knows that the child and her friends lied about a call that they alleged was made by max sica to the complainant child during school hours in november 2008, (shortly after max was granted bail over the sex charges) which they claim to have lasted over 30 mins. The phone records showed that the child did not recieve any such call and neither did her friends, and we all know that phone records don't lie.
Here's a real mind boggler........the complianant child alleged that an offence occurred in 2007, 5 days after her friend kim's birthday. (real names not provided due to legal reasons) kim, told the police herself that she did know the complainant child until 2008, when they started high school together. Even if u give the child the benefit of the doubt and say that it could have occured 5 days after her friends kim's birthday in 2008, things do not add up, as during that day in 2008, (which equates to be a tuesday) the complainant child's mother watched her daughter at her house as she was no longer working weekdays by then. It's a real pity that the complainant child's mother has not read the details of the allegations, because if she did, she herself would realise that her daughter has lied immensely.
The police did not take the child for a medical examination until after 6 weeks, after constant pressure from maxs parents, the child was taken to a medical center for examination by a gp. The gp told the court under cross examiantion in commital, that she did NOT examine the child's hymen at all after speaking to the sexual assault unit over the phone who advised her not to carry out the examination. She only took a specimen to check for bacteria culture and to look for urine infection. She HERSELF, from her own mouth told the court that she never once said that the child was not a virgin, as she did not examine her for that. however, when the complainant child went to the specialist, she told her that the other gp had said that she was definetely not a virgin. Even the mother of the complainant child said that the doctor said that "she thought that penetration had occurred", however the gp said that she never said that. how could she, when she did not examine the girls hymen??? even the specialist said that the childs hymen was fully intact, thick, and without any injury or abnormalities. (which is normally present in sexually active girls, especially if sex is occurring at least once a fortnight for 4 years) this piece of evidence is mind boggling too, especially if u consider the fact that the child herself told the police that "it hurt" her so bad on nearly every occasion they had sex and that sometimes it hurt her for days after as well, to the point where she would "whimper" and "cry" after urinating............wierd isn't it?
The most disgusting fact about the police is that they did not even bother to question anybody at all. don't they have a duty of care towards children?? How come they never questioned max's daughter, niece, son, and partner's brother??? (all of whom are ALIBI WITNESSES), the police would have known this if they had bothered to investigate everything properly. What if max had been molesting other children in the family??? what would the police say if this had turned out to be the case? where does their duty of care lie....I wonder. They did not attempt to question max's partner until the day they charged max with the allegations. After max was arrested and taken away by police, 2 female officers approached his partner and asked if she was willing to talk to the police, naturally, anybody that has common sense will know (and ask any lawyer) that once a person is charged, it is futile for ALIBI witnesses to talk to the police. The sadest part is, max's wife was always willing to talk to police if they had approached her, prior to arresting max. and it would have been better for the police case, as at that time the defense did not know the details of the allegations. If the police had simply asked a question such as "do u recall the night that ............................ and ...................?" (in due time all the evidence of the defense will fill in the gaps) that would have been enough to find out the truth. They did it in the complainant child's friends' case, i wonder why they didnt do that in max's. But i must give the police credit for "attempting" to talk to max's wife's younger brother. They went to the wrong address......this is ironic as shiv's (max's wife) parents have always rented, and tenancy information is readily available to police.
This case was the reason why the police ended up jumping the gun and charging max with triple murder. Max got charged with the sex allegations in late october, got bail 2 weeks later in mid of november, and arrested with triple murder a week after he got married in december to his partner for 5 years. The police knew that the child had lied but it was too late for them, as they couldn't have max get off the sex charges as it would prove to the public just how badly the police wanted him for the murders.
The lead detectives in the sex case was liasing with the lead detectives (mr zitny, homicide squad) from the murder investigation. Ironic part is, that mr zitny was working for the child protection unit in pine rivers that same year. This is the officer who denied under oath that max was a prime suspect in the triple murder. He had said that max was only ever a "person of interest" and that he didn't become the prime suspect in the killings until an year later, which was disproved with documentation which showed that max was a prime suspect in the killings within less than 12 hours of the discovery of the bodies. This is one of the reasons why max's family is fighting for max's bail so strongly, because they all were told by many lawyers to expect an arrest for the murders as the police will not want to look stupid in front of the public, and this way they could get him for one or the other set of charges. oh, did i forget to mention that 2 of the 20 sex charges alones carries 2 life sentences, which means, if convicted, max would be spending a minimum of 20 to 30 years behind prison? Just wait and see, the sex trial will occur early next year before the complainant child reaches the age of 16 and is able to be cross examined as an adult. It is a real pity that the police didnt do their job properly, as once the trial begins, they will look like real fools, especially when the alibi witnesses for the days in question are presented. Not only that, the alibi witnesses have got evidence to back up their witness testimonies, eg phone records, bank statements, photos, videos, passports, school records, POLICE records and many more will prove the extent to which the complainant child has lied and the lack of proper police investigation in this matter.
The police did not speak to many of the crown witnesses( child's friends, etc) until after max was arrested with the allegations. I pray that anyone that has commonsense can now understand the legal politics which surrounds the murder charges, moreso, due to the fact that police shot themselves in the foot when they jumped the gun and charged max with the murders when they realised that the child's story didnt add up........maybe thats why they didnt even bother to question any of the sica family members, because they knew that then, they (the police) will not be able to say in the end that they knew both sides of the story.
The police have always tried to taint max's name through trial by media, and what better opportunity then when a child is involved? please do not take our word for it, just wait until the trial starts and when the defense produces it's evidence. the family will naturally then come out to the media with the entire evidence, including a really long list of alibi witnesses, most of which are children. Think about it, the police was thorough in Chloe`s case and questioned people (from suspects side) to establish the childs creditability. I wonder why they never did that in max SICA`S CASE. They did not attempt to question the defences main alibi witnesses (which is common police practice) until after Max got charged.
Anyone that reads this, if u really are a person of truth and integrity, please pray that god shows the truth in this matter for both the sake of the complainant child (someone who max and shiv treated as if their own child) and for max, Amen. Mark my words, max will get vindicated by god, who knows and sees all, and if this does not come to pass, u can spit on our faces. Thats how much evidence the defense has, and guess what, it's really not evidence at all, its the TRUTH. and if it wasnt, then everyone apart from the complainant child is telling the truth, including people who don't know max personally but will be able to provide alibi witness testimony.
Watch the trial it will be very very enlighting and entertaining (because a circus will be made out of the legal system) and it will prove the many fundamental flaws in the QLD governement and QLD police system which has been seen from the Fitzgerald Inquiry right up until today. For example, the Graham Stafford case, Lindy Chamberlain case, Millard case just to name a few. Now Max Sica, who is going to be the man for this century.
Saturday, April 10, 2010
ALLEGED SEX OFFENCE CHARGES
Man charged with rape of child
Posted Fri Apr 9, 2010 1:43pm AEST
Brisbane man Massimo "Max" Sica has been indicted on 20 child sex charges in the District Court.
The charges include one count of maintaining a sexual relationship with a girl under 16 years, two counts of rape, six counts of unlawful carnal knowledge with a child and nine counts of indecent dealing with a child.
It is alleged the girl was aged between 9 and 13 at the time of the offences, between 2004 and 2008.
The matter has been adjourned until May 10 in the Brisbane District Court.
TMC AND DOUSER...............................
This is the latest newspaper article about Max Sica and the alleged sex offence charges.
If anyone of you was at the committal regarding these alleged sex charges then you must have also heard this................
A medical examination was done on this girl and this is what was found:
Her hymen if fully intact, no scaring, no trauma, no tearing. She is a virgin.
Another thing is this.... Max Sica has been under police surveillence since the murders occurred in 2003. This was also shown to be true at the committal for the Singh murders. House was fully bugged, phones were tapped, cars were bugged, gps surveillance was used and he was followed around by undercover police. I do not think that police would know such a thing and not do anything about it. This is why Max Sica was then charged with the Singh murders on the 30th of December 2008. Nearly six years after. Nothing had changed, no new evidence had come out or was made available, no smoking gun, no miracle witness.
You dont have to believe me if i say he did not and would never ever harm a child in this way or anyother way. The FACTS are all out in the open. By the way, the other girl who was saying that her stepfather was molesting her etc,,,, she told police it was not true and that was the end of that. JUSTICE? Not if your name happens to be Massimo Sica.
Posted Fri Apr 9, 2010 1:43pm AEST
Brisbane man Massimo "Max" Sica has been indicted on 20 child sex charges in the District Court.
The charges include one count of maintaining a sexual relationship with a girl under 16 years, two counts of rape, six counts of unlawful carnal knowledge with a child and nine counts of indecent dealing with a child.
It is alleged the girl was aged between 9 and 13 at the time of the offences, between 2004 and 2008.
The matter has been adjourned until May 10 in the Brisbane District Court.
TMC AND DOUSER...............................
This is the latest newspaper article about Max Sica and the alleged sex offence charges.
If anyone of you was at the committal regarding these alleged sex charges then you must have also heard this................
The girl who is making the accusations against Max Sica says that she has had full on intercourse with him (a fully grown adult) at least once a week or once a fortnight from the age of 9 till the age of 13. She alleges it started in 2004 and continued until 2008. When police questioned her the first time about these so called allegations, she said that since her friend was telling her that her stepfather was molesting her, she wanted to know more and be closer to her so she made up a story that she was molested too, and since Max Sica was known because of all the publicity on him, she used his name and made it all up.
Police later questioned her and she then said that it was true, that Max Sica had sex with her for at least four years and regularly.
A medical examination was done on this girl and this is what was found:
Her hymen if fully intact, no scaring, no trauma, no tearing. She is a virgin.
Im not an expert but i am a woman and there is no way on earth you could still be like that if you have had sex with a fully grown man and you a child for all those years and on many, many occassions. This is just what the medical examination shows. There is so much other evidence that i cannot mention now because of pending legal issues.
Another thing is this.... Max Sica has been under police surveillence since the murders occurred in 2003. This was also shown to be true at the committal for the Singh murders. House was fully bugged, phones were tapped, cars were bugged, gps surveillance was used and he was followed around by undercover police. I do not think that police would know such a thing and not do anything about it. This is why Max Sica was then charged with the Singh murders on the 30th of December 2008. Nearly six years after. Nothing had changed, no new evidence had come out or was made available, no smoking gun, no miracle witness.
You dont have to believe me if i say he did not and would never ever harm a child in this way or anyother way. The FACTS are all out in the open. By the way, the other girl who was saying that her stepfather was molesting her etc,,,, she told police it was not true and that was the end of that. JUSTICE? Not if your name happens to be Massimo Sica.
COMMENT MADE.....
speakupnbeheardJuly 25, 2012 12:11 PM
We had a situation where my partner was accused of molesting his own daughter (aged 4 at the time) after his recent marital breakup. The child is a slow developer and her speech at that stage was very limited. We would see the child on a fortnightly basis with bruises and telling us stories* and games* of her being "hurt". It got to a point where this could no longer be ignored. My partner was advised to take her to the juvenile department of the police dept; they questioned and watched as father and child related to one another. The mother stormed into the police dept with her solicitor (straight from work after being notified her child was suspected of being molested)and was told to take the child to hospital for an examination. This did not occur. Mother waited 3 days later, then went to her normal GP where no vaginal examinations occurred, and the child was able to CLEARLY state that her father had "hurt" her. Mother and doctor gave her a big hug and told her that she was a good girl. When DOCS spoke with the child, where the child once again gave her spiel (exact same words she gave to the doctor), they too gave her a big cuddle and told her she was a good girl. For a little girl craving for love and attention, she was taught that if she said these words, she would get cuddles and kisses. We had to have supervised visits for approx. 6mths. DOCS wanted my partner to go to pedophile group meetings; this disgusted him and he refused. They threatened that if he didn't, he wouldn't be allowed to see his daughter at all, and that it would hurt his case; he still refused to go - he was not a pedophile - and being put into a room with pedophiles would have riled him - and for him to have to listen to what they said would have outraged him even more. It wasn't until just before court that the child was interviewed by a counsellor; once the child gave the spiel(by rote)she said "Do you like my pretty necklace it's a butterfly?" (both sentences) all in the one breath, the counsellor's alarm bells rang. It cost us over $62,000 to clear my partners name through the court system and to be able to see his daughter without supervision. The person doing the "hurting" fled to NZ when we went to the police in the first instance. Police were wanting to question him but never got the chance. 7 years on - we know that the mother had taught the child what to say - we also know that her mother had an inkling of what was going on but too scared to say - plus - it was a good way to "get back" at her husband. DOCS wanted my partners head on a platter. Why would the so-called pedophile take a child to the police to tell them she is being molested?!! We have life-inexperienced school kids making detrimental life altering decisions (about us) in our justice systems. Also....the media....the justice system....just want someone to blame. It makes a good story, and it makes our politicians look good....I'm sorry, but that is a high price for us innocent to pay.
Friday, February 19, 2010
TO CLEAR SOME POINTS FOR YOU ANONYMOUS ONE
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.
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
