Bring me my machine gun
#94
BE Forum Addict
Thread Starter
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,881
Re: Bring me my machine gun
Your question is absurd. It presupposes I have some privileged access to the judge's mind. Like so much that you post here, it is designed merely to deceive.
However, it is safe to assume that the judge did not have access to knowledge of Zuma's, and the victim's, subsequent history.
You confuse legalism with justice. You confuse real life with a court room. You confuse opinion with legal judgements. You fail to understand that any court is limited, and that the limitation of its judgements is whether guilt (not innocence) has been proven within the confines of the court.
It is you who keeps trying to reduce this to some sort of idiotic rehash of Zuma's court case. It just won't wash.
However, it is safe to assume that the judge did not have access to knowledge of Zuma's, and the victim's, subsequent history.
You confuse legalism with justice. You confuse real life with a court room. You confuse opinion with legal judgements. You fail to understand that any court is limited, and that the limitation of its judgements is whether guilt (not innocence) has been proven within the confines of the court.
It is you who keeps trying to reduce this to some sort of idiotic rehash of Zuma's court case. It just won't wash.
#96
BE Forum Addict
Thread Starter
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,881
Re: Bring me my machine gun
For a start, the judge could not have known that this supposedly strong-minded and manipulative woman would end up a psychological wreck living in exile in Holland. If he had known that, he would perhaps have been less quick to brand her in the way he did.
Second, he could not have been aware of the subsequent legal gymnastics Zuma resorted to in order to avoid the day in court he claims he so eagerly desires. Even if such knowledge had been available to him, he could not have admitted it into consideration since courts of law have to exclude much evidence which people factor into their real-life judgements about people.
Third, the alternative explanation for this victim's bringing her rape charge against Zuma, namely that she was the patsy for some grand conspiracy against Zuma orchestrated by Mbeki, fails to convince -- and I think subsequent events corroborate that view.
None of this could have been known to the judge. Even if it had been known, it could not have been admitted.
That is why, as I keep telling you, courts of law require guilt to be proven, not innocence. Do you really not grasp that?
The woman, the victim, had nothing to gain, irrespective of whether Zuma was found guilty in court. Either way, she loses. So do we accept that she was a hapless pawn in some grand power game played by dark and unidentified forces opposed to Zuma (e.g., Mbeki)? Or perhaps merely insane? My view is no. Yours may differ. Fine.
Was the victim a sly, strong, manipulative woman, as the judge suggested? My judgement is that she was not.
So I maintain what I have always said. That in my opinion she was raped by a violent ignorant philanderer drunk on power and the lust for power, who thought he could do what he pleased, when he pleased, who thought he could have his way with everything, including with this vulnerable woman whom he was supposed to be protecting; a man, in short, who thought he was invincible.
Second, he could not have been aware of the subsequent legal gymnastics Zuma resorted to in order to avoid the day in court he claims he so eagerly desires. Even if such knowledge had been available to him, he could not have admitted it into consideration since courts of law have to exclude much evidence which people factor into their real-life judgements about people.
Third, the alternative explanation for this victim's bringing her rape charge against Zuma, namely that she was the patsy for some grand conspiracy against Zuma orchestrated by Mbeki, fails to convince -- and I think subsequent events corroborate that view.
None of this could have been known to the judge. Even if it had been known, it could not have been admitted.
That is why, as I keep telling you, courts of law require guilt to be proven, not innocence. Do you really not grasp that?
The woman, the victim, had nothing to gain, irrespective of whether Zuma was found guilty in court. Either way, she loses. So do we accept that she was a hapless pawn in some grand power game played by dark and unidentified forces opposed to Zuma (e.g., Mbeki)? Or perhaps merely insane? My view is no. Yours may differ. Fine.
Was the victim a sly, strong, manipulative woman, as the judge suggested? My judgement is that she was not.
So I maintain what I have always said. That in my opinion she was raped by a violent ignorant philanderer drunk on power and the lust for power, who thought he could do what he pleased, when he pleased, who thought he could have his way with everything, including with this vulnerable woman whom he was supposed to be protecting; a man, in short, who thought he was invincible.
#97
Re: Bring me my machine gun
Sounds like a willing and wanting participant in this event. He's not happy with the multiple spouses he has to screw that he continues to have sex with someone that could not talk, move or do anything?? Could she have been scared and if so wonder why? Gee, even I get to understand that this does not sound like a consensual roll in the hay.
#98
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,424
Re: Bring me my machine gun
wonder if she was tested for Rohepnol?
going to have to find some time this weekend to go through the transcripts of Jacobs testimony.
I dont know how credible a witness I would have been arriving at court everyday and having to go through throngs of chanting,toy-toying hooligans all shouting to "burn the Bitch".
In addition,in the few Rape Court cases I have witnessed, the Defence usually puts the plaintiff on trial and Kemp Kemp is a brutal interrogator.
going to have to find some time this weekend to go through the transcripts of Jacobs testimony.
I dont know how credible a witness I would have been arriving at court everyday and having to go through throngs of chanting,toy-toying hooligans all shouting to "burn the Bitch".
In addition,in the few Rape Court cases I have witnessed, the Defence usually puts the plaintiff on trial and Kemp Kemp is a brutal interrogator.
#99
Re: Bring me my machine gun
Second, he could not have been aware of the subsequent legal gymnastics Zuma resorted to in order to avoid the day in court he claims he so eagerly desires. Even if such knowledge had been available to him, he could not have admitted it into consideration since courts of law have to exclude much evidence which people factor into their real-life judgements about people.
So I maintain what I have always said. That in my opinion she was raped by a violent ignorant philanderer drunk on power and the lust for power, who thought he could do what he pleased, when he pleased, who thought he could have his way with everything, including with this vulnerable woman whom he was supposed to be protecting; a man, in short, who thought he was invincible.
Last edited by Stanley10; Oct 13th 2008 at 3:32 am.
#100
Re: Bring me my machine gun
Sounds like a willing and wanting participant in this event. He's not happy with the multiple spouses he has to screw that he continues to have sex with someone that could not talk, move or do anything?? Could she have been scared and if so wonder why? Gee, even I get to understand that this does not sound like a consensual roll in the hay.
#101
BE Forum Addict
Thread Starter
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,881
Re: Bring me my machine gun
No, Stanley. What is boils down to is that there is a reasonable possibility that he did it, which only he and she know for sure; and that in these circumstances, coupled with the separate corruption charges, he should not put himself forward as head of state.
#102
Re: Bring me my machine gun
No Pabs, there is always a possibility (anything is possible), however it is not reasonable.
#103
Re: Bring me my machine gun
Goes to show how in the first world one would understand her response to implicitly indicate whether the event was welcomed or not. Perhaps Mr Zuma, and his supporters could use a lesson in basic human behaviour to understand that "no" comes in very many interpretations. She may not have had the choice of saying "no" to a man of his stature even if she did not want the event to occur. I suppose we should consider Zuma's lack of education and values towards women when assessing his behaviour.
#104
Re: Bring me my machine gun
Goes to show how in the first world one would understand her response to implicitly indicate whether the event was welcomed or not. Perhaps Mr Zuma, and his supporters could use a lesson in basic human behaviour to understand that "no" comes in very many interpretations. She may not have had the choice of saying "no" to a man of his stature even if she did not want the event to occur. I suppose we should consider Zuma's lack of education and values towards women when assessing his behaviour.
#105
BE Forum Addict
Thread Starter
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,881
Re: Bring me my machine gun
No, anything is not possible. Your whole approach puts me in mind of the dogged pedestrian legalism of an inferior police inspector or a second-rate lawyer. You are like one of those people who deny that Hitler had anything to do with the Holocaust on the grounds that no signed document has been found.