Inconsistencies in evidence that do not acquit Shrien Dewani, but rather raise many more questions than answers, have begun to come to light recently.

Today, Xolile Mngeni, 25, will hear his fate and become the last of Anni’s South African killers to face justice for her murder two years ago last Tuesday, besides Shrien of course.

Shrien has been fighting his extradition battle, and also plans to sue for the alleged motive behind his ordered killing of his wife: homosexual liaisons. His lawyers also say there is a perfectly innocent way of explaining what happened on that fateful night.

Though there is plenty of circumstantial evidence that links Shrien to the killers such as phone calls and CCTV footage of meetings between Shrien and at least one of those convicted for Anni’s murder, inconsistencies in the police cases have threatened to raise more doubt than certainty.

Testimonies from men involved in the murder have firmly pointed the finger at Shrien for orchestrating and paying for the murder, but some of their statements from the time of the murder just don’t add up now.

Reports the Daily Mail, of Mngeni’s case:

Police video footage recorded from 20h16 on November 16, 2010, showed the small-time drug dealer, then 23, revealing how, having taken the Dewanis’ valuables, he wanted to kick the couple out of the taxi.

Calling his accomplice ‘Mawewe’, he said: ‘I asked Mawewe, ‘What are we going to do with these two? Let us throw them here.”

His partner-in-crime disagreed and drove on. Mngeni said: ‘Then he stopped the vehicle. He then took his firearm and I thought we were going to leave. And he climbed off the vehicle and walked around to my side. He opened the passenger doors right behind me. And the white lady was sitting at the back, next to the other door. He then pulled a small bag from this lady and the lady was hanging on, crying and she was scared. Then I heard one gunshot. Then I asked Mawewe, the thing that is he doing, what caused him to do it? Then we started arguing. Then he told me I cannot tell him what to do.’

If this first police statement is the truth then Anni’s murder seems to have been something rather different from the professional ‘hit’ the police claim.

While this certainly doesn’t rule out the fact that Shrien could have ordered the killing, it does show that the men involved didn’t really have much of a plan.

Continues the Mail:

All of the main witnesses ranged against Shrien have told stories which, in one way or another, disagree with each other.

The testimonies of Tongo, Qwabe and the ‘middle man’ – whose identity the South African court has banned from being published – do not tally in numerous, potentially crucial, ways.

Tongo and Qwabe disagree on who sat where in the hijacked taxi; they disagree on who said what while in the taxi; they disagree on who held the gun. On the issue of payment, the witnesses are equally divided.

Tongo claims that the ‘middle man’ demanded R5 000 for his help while the ‘middle man’ said he did it for free.

Qwabe claims he and Mngeni agreed to the murder for R7 500 each. But Tongo, who commissioned them, said it was much less – just R5 000 each.

There are many more inconsistencies. For Shrien’s legal team – who are understood to have been monitoring the trial closely – they are evidential gold dust.

Shrien Dewani is still being held in a secure psychiatric facility near his home in Bristol while he receives treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder and depression that his psychiatrists say he has suffered since the incident.

Read more HERE.

[Source: Daily Mail]