Sunni V shia now called unfinished business , dont matter that a innocent is dead

[jack404]

Unfinished business relating to a man being punched at a Sydney shopping centre sparked a gunfight which left an innocent bystander dead, a jury has been told.

Crown prosecutor Pat Barrett said the punch led to phone calls, then to things getting "more and more heated" and to the "gathering of the troops" with firearms in a KFC car park.

He was giving his final address today at the NSW Supreme Court trial of three men accused of murdering Canberra truckie Bob Knight, who died after being hit by a stray bullet as he drove along Milperra Road in western Sydney on June 25, 2009.


Adel Elkobaili, 21, Mahmoud Mariam, 28, and a 20-year-old man - who cannot be named as he was a juvenile at the time - have denied the charge.
Mr Barrett alleged Mariam fired the fatal shot, or alternatively, that he was part of a joint criminal enterprise with his co-accused.

Its object was to inflict grievous bodily harm on a member of the opposing group by the use of firearms, he said.
Referring to liability for murder, Mr Barrett said: "It does not matter whether the death was the death of an intended victim or the death of some other person, in this case an innocent bystander."

Hours before the gunfight, the juvenile punched another young man at a suburban shopping centre.
This resulted in five men in the Mariam group and six, including the juvenile and Elkobaili, in the other group going to the KFC car park, where a pistol and a rifle were fired, Mr Barrett said.

Some trial witnesses were "obstructive, aggressive, unwilling" and had little regard to the oath they had sworn, he noted.
"Some of them put on quite significant performances before you in this trial," Mr Barrett said, telling the jurors it was up to them whether they accepted or rejected any evidence.

Mr Barrett said the witnesses were aware that if they gave evidence in accordance with their earlier statements, they might be regarded as "dogs", or informants.
"They may have perceived there was some risk to them in coming to court giving evidence," he said.


( i wonder why? they have only openly stated there $50,000 for anyone who kills the witness's and two are already dead so yeah people may think theres a risk you idiot)

He submitted that the jurors would reject their explanations that they were threatened or subjected to police brutality, or that things had been put in their statements which they did not say.
The trial is continuing before Justice Megan Latham.


Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/shopping-c...#ixzz1uRoVf8lD

[raven818]

"It does not matter whether the death was the death of an intended victim or the death of some other person, in this case an innocent bystander."

That's the most honest reply I've ever read.
It don't matter who dies, as long as somebody does.

Some trial witnesses were "obstructive, aggressive, unwilling" and had little regard to the oath they had sworn, he noted.

Right out of the Gitmo handbook.