Xolile Mngeni was found guilty as the man who shot Anni. The judge ruled “the accused could barely avoid the avalanche of evidence proven by the state that came crushing down upon him.”
Despite his filmed confession of not being involved, he was jailed for life without parole.
But was the gunmen in the right passenger seat, as the state claim? There are other equally likely options. They have not considered all likely scenarios.
Could the driver Qwabe, who was given a plea bargain by the state, have been the gunman? Anni was looking towards the driver’s side of the car, at the time that she is shot.
It looks like the South African prosecution team had missed opportunities to establish the identity of Anni’s killer beyond doubt. They seem to have failed to collect properly, or analyse all the forensic samples taken from the taxi for gunshot residue.
One of the UK’s leading experts in gunshot residue, Angela Shaw from the Forensic Firearms Consultancy has questions. ” Who had the gun, who fired the gun, were they sitting in the front seat, or at the back of the vehicle? We don’t know from the evidence we have seen.” There is no evidence that the hijackers hands or clothes were tested. But it is the lack of sampling in the taxi, that concerns her most. “The samples that they did analyse, were all taken from the rear seat. This really does not provide enough information to establish where the gunman was sitting in the car.” When a gun is fired, clues go everywhere. A lot of clues were not even looked at. “There was a very limited approach”
In fact what we are dealing with here is a policing system that use confessions from criminals, and individual witness evidence against Shrien Dewani and there had been some very big miscarriages of justice from cases that rely on this type of evidence.
The Money Disappear
When the gunmen abandoned the taxi they fled to split the takings. But they all disagree on how much they got. The driver Qwabe said they found R10 000 behind the seat, not R15 000 as they were expecting, and they split it in half. But Mngeni never mentioned the R10 000. The only one of the accused who does not claim that Shrien was paying them, said they shared only the cash they stole from him at gunpoint – R4000 which they shared in two.
This would indicate that there was no murder for hire, but rather a criminal element or syndicate preying on unsuspecting “rich tourists”, robbing them for money.
Evidence supports that. Mngeni spend just under R2000 on trainers and clothes the day after Anni’s killing. So what happened to the missing R10 000?
The money was never seen again.
Next Page: After the Murder