WARNING: This is Version 1 of my old archive, so Photos will NOT work and many links will NOT work. But you can find articles by searching on the Titles. There is a lot of information in this archive. Use the SEARCH BAR at the top right. Prior to December 2012; I was a pro-Christian type of Conservative. I was unaware of the mass of Jewish lies in history, especially the lies regarding WW2 and Hitler. So in here you will find pro-Jewish and pro-Israel material. I was definitely WRONG about the Boeremag and Janusz Walus. They were for real.
Original Post Date: 2008-04-18 Time: 00:00:00 Posted By: Jan
By Sherlissa Peters
Convicted murderess Yasmin Shaik took the stand on Thursday testifying for the State in the trial of Nershendren “Nico” Vather.
Shaik gained notoriety as the so-called “suitcase murderess” and was sentenced to 10 years’ imprisonment for murder in 1994.
She was found guilty of masterminding the murder of her husband’s mistress, Ashia Hassangee, who was drowned in a bath in her Johannesburg home in November 1992 by three men.
Vather is charged with the murder of his 38-year-old wife Valentia, who was killed on November 2, 2005.
Her body was found in the rented home she shared with Vather and their 2-year-old son in Prestbury, Pietermaritzburg. She was stabbed in the neck and chest.
Police were alerted to the murder after Vather allegedly confessed to a friend that he had killed Valentia.
He has pleaded not guilty to murder.
In a statement to the court, Vather said that when he left the house he shared with Valentia on the night she was killed, he had left her in the company of Shaik, a woman he alleges he had a relationship with.
In her evidence in chief, Shaik denied she had any romantic relationship with Vather and denied she was at his home on the night Valentia was killed. Shaik explained she had first met Vather while they were both in custody at New Hanover Prison in 2001.
Shaik said that after she had been released from prison in December 2002, Vather came to her workplace twice to harass her for money.
She later changed her story under cross examination, claiming he had come to her workplace once, and then accosted her on the street where he stole her bangles.
Judge Piet Koen warned Shaik that her evasive testimony affected her credibility as a witness.
“The court gets the impression you are replying in an evasive manner and that you are playing with the court. There appears to be a deeper history to this,” he said.
Vather claims Shaik had fallen in love with him and had an obsession with him
Vather claims further that the relationship between them soured because he refused to leave his wife.
Shaik’s son-in-law, Mohamed Peerbhai, took the stand next and confirmed her alibi, saying that Shaik was at home with family on the night of the murder.