Pablo

Hardly a surprise after the terrifying threats of his grim supporters. Next stop the presidency... and there will be a few scores to settle.

Zuma let off on a technicality
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...dismissed.html

Tegwyn

All this stuff would have taken them right up to Mbeki's doorstep as well. Not only that, how does a judge impose a conviction knowing full well there are gobs of supporters that are dead keen to use him as target practice should he not conform to their demands. Now watch the exodus happen in SA. They know what comes next.

Pablo

Yes... And for the holiday-makers:

Briton murdered in front of his wife in South Africa
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...th-Africa.html

Africanrose

As much as it scares me that Zuma will be the next president of SA, and that this verdict probably confirms the belief of the likes of Mamela that they are demi-gods, a true justice system has to work both ways. While Zuma may be as guilty as sin, cutting corners to prove it is not going to do anyone any favours.

Pablo

In spite of Zuma's claims that he wants his day in court, he had done his level best to avoid that day. The judge has said that there is nothing to prevent the prosecution being brought again. But is this likely, given the level of threat and intimidation? Is it your view that the prosecution should be brought again, and that Zuma should answer the charges, rather than pull every trick in the legal book in order to avoid answering them?

Daxk

Africanrose, for the sake of my immediate Family's safety, I'm glad this has been post poned. there was a strong likelihood of Civil unrest.
For the Country's future it would have been far better to have faced a court and won, than to be let off on another technicality, after the threats made by people who will be in positions of power if Zuma gets in..

This morning I have another email and just had another Skype conversation
with friends who want to know what Ireland is like to live in.
The Brain drain is starting to swirl.

Daxk

I was told by a journo friend that they have been asked to take it easy on incidents that paint SA in a bad light.
I accept that The DM may often be over the top but the above article does sound as if it is a far more accurate reflection than this SA Report:
http://www.news24.com/News24/South_A...392647,00.html
Very low key I feel.

Pablo

Yes, Daxk, I agree.

I also agree with what you say about under-reporting of "bad news" - not only crime, but other stuff too. And then, as in this case, Brits fly out there and receive a surprise - in this case sudden death.

But it has gone on for a while now. As we know, there is a good deal of pressure to toe the party line. Whites who do not are "racists"; blacks who do not are Uncle Toms.

... Easier to conform, and keep your mouth shut.

As for Zuma, the central question is whether - as seems likely - he is guilty. Avoiding prosecution through legalistic conjuring tricks does not make that central question go away.

The ghastly truth is that his supporters don't care a jot whether he's guilty, just as they didn't care a jot about whether he raped that poor woman. It's just all good red-blooded-male stuff. Rape? Hey, it's what real men do.

Stanley10

You seem to have made the judgement already, no need for a court case then.


He goes to court, the judge finds in his favour, not really a trick, perhaps its the way the justice system works.

Just as you don't care a jot that he may not be guilty, remember the judge who decided this case found him not guilty.

El_Chango

OOOf! Pablo. I think it becomes a reflex for local news organisations to begin and keep under-reporting on local violence. I know a normal person says to themselves that this is counterintuitive in an industry that survives on ratings and advertising sales....But remember, "normal" people, and this has to include local reporters, sometimes, must react to their own revulsion to the content and nature of the crap they must report. Can you say "Pangloss..."? Heck Pablo, you're the one who brought him up first, right? My Voltaire reference notwithstanding...

Thanks Daxk BTW. My brother's in Houston and my people are tossing me around the country,a little overwhelmed. Will read and respond.

El_Chango

Stanley, how do you sleep?

Tegwyn

Next you are going to tell us that there is law and order in South Africa!!! They're all just simply grossly misunderstood even if Zuma made it very clear that Mbeki and cronies would go down with him if necessary. Mmmm, dirty laundry there perhaps?!?!

Africanrose

If there is sufficient evidence to prosecute someone then they should be made to answer the charges. Plain and simple, and regardless of their station. I just wish that the NPA had taken into account these matters when deciding to bring new charges and had not made a procedural error, especially given the climate in which they were brought.
This case was not about guilt or innocence, it was about how the legal system should function. Granted, it was brought to avoid having to confront the question of guilt in an open court, but guilty or not (and I think Zuma doth protest too much to be able to claim that he has absolutely nothing to hide), those procedures are in place for a reason and cannot be swept aside just because the person in question has a dubious history, or people would feel better if he were barred from becoming the next president.
Unfortunately, given the current atmosphere and the way in which the situation has been allowed to fester, I don't think they will be used to determine Zuma's guilt or innocence in the foreseeable future. More's the pity

Daxk

Stanley10:"Just as you don't care a jot that he may not be guilty, remember the judge who decided this case found him not guilty"
The Judge did'nt say that at all, Stanley.
The Judge found that procedure had not been followed which infringed on Zuma's Rights, JZ Got off on a technicality as he should have been charged at the same time as Shaik.
The Door has been left open.

Stanley10

Yep, but I was refering to the rape case.