Court shocked by tale of murder, sex, wives and videotape

Do You Like This Story?

THE father of the murdered Singh siblings today denied he once asked his wife to approach his children's accused killer Max Sica to take part in a sexual threesome.

Vijay Singh was being cross-examined on the eighth day of a Supreme Court trial in Brisbane in which Sica, 41, has pleaded not guilty to murdering Neelma Singh, 24, Kunal Singh, 18, and Sidhi Singh, 12, at their home at Bridgeman Downs, in Brisbane's north, on April 21, 2003.

Barrister Sam Di Carlo, for Sica, put it to Vijay Singh that he had asked his wife Shirley Singh to approach Sica to have sex with them.

He asked if Vijay Singh had thought Sica was gay and would take part in a sexual threesome.

"No, I don't agree with that," Vijay Singh said.

Mr Di Carlo accused Vijay Singh of wanting Shirley Singh to have sex with Sica and he could listen over the phone while he was in Fiji.

Vijay Singh rejected the claim and also that he pressured Shirley Singh into going to the casino to pick up strange men for sex so that she could tell him about it.

He also denied he had "turned on" Sica when he discovered Sica and Shirley had pretended to have sex to please him.

Vijay Singh agreed that Shirley Singh would "tease him" but she would do nothing.

Mr Di Carlo asked whether Vijay Singh had hired a prostitute to come to his house for sex when they lived at Stafford.

"It happened twice ... the children were not home," Vijay Singh said.

He agreed with Mr Di Carlo, Shirley Singh would get drunk and be ill when he hired the prostitutes.

Vijay Singh agreed that he had sex with his nephew's wife in his office and videotaped it.

Earlier, Mr Di Carlo asked extensive questions about when Vijay Singh sold his business to V.C. Dutta, who he regarded as brother-in-law, and on behalf of V.L. Dutta, who he regarded as a nephew.

He was to receive $500,000 (Fijian) and was to get another $250,000 in Australia.

Mr Di Carlo said V.L. Dutta couldn't repay $140,000 in time and they started to negotiate an agreement variation.

Vijay Singh agreed when he sold the business there was a restraint of trade clause which prevented him from working in Fiji in any similar business

However, when the Duttas defaulted they renegotiated the contract with the restraint clause removed and a new interest rate.

Mr Di Carlo accused Vijay Singh of pressing the point while V.C. Dutta was sick in bed and dying but Vijay Singh rejected the claim.

Vijay Singh also said he didn't recall whether he argued with his wife Shirley about pressing V.C. Dutta when he was sick.

"That is Shirley's version I don't agree with that," he said.

Mr Di Carlo said as a result of the restraint of trade being lifted Vijay Singh had gone back to Fiji and started a new company which was in direct opposition to the Duttas.

The court heard V.C. Dutta passed away, their business failed and they couldn't pay the balance of money owed to Vijay Singh who took court action against them.

"You got a judgment in your favour and you bankrupted him (V.L. Dutta)," Mr Di Carlo said.

"I don't call it bankrupt," Vijay Singh said.

Mr Di Carlo alleged V.L. Dutta had to sell his only remaining property: "You steamrolled them as if strangers."

"I did a business dealing, it was protocol," Vijay Singh replied, agreeing business was business.

Mr Singh also told Mr Di Carlo he originally had no problems with Max Sica.

On two occasions when he argued with Neelma - once when she was working on a computer with Sica and on another occasion when they were playing with Sica's children in a park - Sica had not joined in.

Vijay Singh also agreed he originally had a good relationship with the Sica family and they had looked after his family when Vijay Singh was away on business for long periods.

The trial, before Justice John Byrne, continues.

Info : News