[Zuma’s popularity remains, and perhaps even increases. The other day, there was shock because some Zuma reporters likened him to Jesus Christ. One will have to watch to see what happens. It could be that even if he is found guilty, that it will mean little to his supporters. He may be seen as a wronged man. That he had sex with the woman is indisputable. But, whether it was RAPE is another question, and frankly, in my mind, I don’t really think he raped her. To me, the case doesn’t appear all that strong. Jan]

JOHANNESBURG “ Former deputy president Jacob Zuma could take the stand in his rape trial on Monday after the Johannesburg High Court turned down an application to have the case discharged on Wednesday.

Asked if his client would take the stand when the trial resumes, Zuma™s lawyer Kemp J Kemp would not give a direct answer.

He would also not say which defence witnesses he would call.

œI will see, he said when asked if Intelligence Minister Ronnie Kasrils would testify.

Kemp made the discharge application in terms of section 174 of the Criminal Procedure Act, arguing that the state had not proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Zuma raped a 31-year-old HIV-positive family friend at his Johannesburg home.

Honing in on aspects of her testimony that he considered inconsistent, Kemp called the woman an accomplished liar and told the court there was no medical evidence of rape.

While Judge Willem van der Merwe adjourned to decide on the application, bets were made in Court 4E on whether Zuma would walk free. Zuma himself chatted and joked with his supporters in the front row of the public gallery.

Van der Merwe returned to carefully arrange his legal tomes and pens and take his spectacles out of their case.

Police Superintendent Peter Linda and Commissioner Norman Taioe — whose evidence Kemp had asked be found inadmissible — were on the edge of their seats as Van der Merwe went on to pour himself a glass of water.
Delivering his ruling, Van der Merwe found he could not agree that evidence led by the State was of such poor quality that it could not be accepted.

Also, he was of the opinion that a finding of mens rea (guilty mind) to rape could be made if no more evidence was led.

œThe accused is not entitled to his discharge, he continued.

After quoting a number of legal precedents Kemp had presented, Van der Merwe asked: œWith the foregoing in mind, the question in the present matter then remains… is there evidence on which the accused in this matter might reasonably be convicted?

œPut differently, is there a possibility of a conviction even if he does not enter the witness box and then incriminate himself?

œPut even more simply, will the accused be convicted at the end of the case if he closes his case without testifying or without leading evidence? In deciding the question, the credibility of witnesses played a limited role.

œOnly if evidence of the witnesses was of such poor quality that there is no possibility that it can be accepted, can it be ignored.
Van der Merwe noted that Kemp, in an able, well-prepared and persuasive argument, which concentrated on mens rea, asked him to find that the evidence was of such poor quality.

œIn strong argument, he submitted that a court cannot conclude that the state had proved mens rea beyond a reasonable doubt.

œIn the first, I cannot agree that the evidence led by the state is of such poor quality that it cannot be accepted.

œI can therefore not ignore the evidence so far led.

Van der Merwe continued: œI am of the opinion that there is evidence before me that if nothing more is said, a finding of mens rea to rape can be made.

He would make a ruling on the policemen™s testimony at the end of the trial.

Outside the court, Zuma™s supporters were quiet while the small lobby against rape and abuse of women, danced and hugged.

œIt would be wrong for us to say this case is over, but I think there is a victory from the perspective that it is important for rape survivors to hear what the accused has to say, said Carrie Shelver of People Opposing Women Abuse.

œWe must note that this judge is thinking in a progressive way. He is well read… and is really showing himself to be on the right track, she said as she briefed the group.

Meanwhile, African National Congress Youth League spokesman Zizi Kodwa stressed to Zuma™s supporters that there had been no judgment in the case.
œThe case continues and that is the bottom line.

Kodwa did not tell the few hundred supporters that the application for discharge was denied.

He told them not to believe what they would read in newspapers and hear on the news, as this would lead them to believe that Zuma was guilty.
œMsholozi is not guilty. No court of law has found him guilty.

Kodwa appealed to the crowd to be at the court on Monday at 9.30am, saying their protests had not been fruitless.

Young Communists League secretary Buti Manamela said: œThis is not a battle lost, it™s a battle continued.

He said Zuma had asked them not to update the crowd on the details of the trial as he would do so at the end of the hearing.

In a one-sentence statement issued after Wednesday™s proceedings, State prosecutor Charin de Beer said: œWe have always said that we have a provable case and we are indeed prepared for the next phase of the trial. “ Sapa.

Source: The Citizen
URL: http://www.citizen.co.za/index/article.aspx?p…/p>