City of Cape Town accused of forking out almost R500 000 for DA councillor Nora Grose's legal bill

[Gyre]

Doesn't matter who the politician is or which party it is, toss out the trash

 

[lowriderza]

Has that not always been what politics is all about? A few people who are committed to the ideals and lot more who are just in it for money and power? I don't think it's a recent phenomenon, perhaps the only difference is privatization, it has created a lot more opportunities for politicians to loot. The information age also means things are way more transparent than they used to be.

You may be right to some extent. My thoughts on this are based on what people used to be paid say 60 years ago for being in Politics relative to other jobs at the time.

 

[surface]

You may be right to some extent. My thoughts on this are based on what people used to be paid say 60 years ago for being in Politics relative to other jobs at the time.

people doing it as a career not a Civic Duty

So, your thoughts are based on people in politics 60 years ago. Which country were you brought up where this ideal was seemingly common?

 

[noxibox]

Yes, it's about the amount, not the principle.

Actually it is. If the ANC twats were smart enough to steal at a sustainable pace instead of acting like ravenous animals South Africa would be in a much better position.

 

[surface]

Actually it is. If the ANC twats were smart enough to steal at a sustainable pace instead of acting like ravenous animals South Africa would be in a much better position.

unofficial offices of presidency has noted this novel suggestion of stealing little at a time. May we invite you to a consultant position especially considering that you are not likely to have job currently due to 'You know what'

DM if interested.

 

[TheChamp]

Actually it is. If the ANC twats were smart enough to steal at a sustainable pace instead of acting like ravenous animals South Africa would be in a much better position.

Ramaphosa is stealing at a very sustainable pace, yet that loudmouth Steenhuisen is still on his case, why?

 

[Arthur]

We are all presumed innocent but must use our own to maintain that presumption. Why must public representatives get the option of the public paying to defend them of charges that they stole from that very same public.

I understand where you're coming from regarding defence of innocence at own expense.

But that's not a principle demanded by the postulates of justice or the public good, especially not in the prosecution of public officials for alleged crimes arising from their employment in the public service.

It's well established over millennia that political enemies can and do bring malicious or politically-motivated prosecutions in the hope of neutralising their political enemies. Given the complexities of modern law and the huge expense of counsel, were an individual personally responsible for mounting their defence against charges arising from their employment, it is easy to paralyse and even bankrupt an otherwise innocent political foe by repeatedly bringing charges of serious malfeasance.

Clearly, this would in some way offend justice, and so a way needs to be found to ensure right is done.

The most practical way is to have the public employer (ultimately the taxpayer) carry the cost of such a defence, and then to recover such costs should the defendant be found guilty in an open and impartial court.

It's the last step that's missing: Once a defendant is convicted, justice further requires that the taxpayer-funded cost of defence be recovered from the criminal.

 

[TheMightyQuinn]

What a brilliant point never made in the history of mybb. I am surprised no one claimed victimhood yet. 'My people' and so on. Tsk. tsk, forum is slipping..

That's YOUR specialty...isn't that why you monitor braaivleis conversations in Perth 24/7?

 

[R13...]

The most practical way is to have the public employer (ultimately the taxpayer) carry the cost of such a defence, and then to recover such costs should the defendant be found guilty in an open and impartial court.

It's the last step that's missing: Once a defendant is convicted, justice further 0 requires that the cost of defence be recovered from the criminal.

If you mean last step missing as not being enforced then yes you are right. The recovery only gets enforced when it is politically expedient in the destruction of the person convicted, otherwise the state attorney drag their feet and allow it to lapse unless some journalist finds out. In which case they'll make placating noises but still do nothing.

It is also mostly impractical as the accused either has no money at the end of the trial or they just prefer not to their ill gotten gains in paying it back. I mean you're jailed already, so why give any of the money back. Rather stash it and enjoy it on release and it could come in handy in case the state does come to recover the stolen loot and sell off your stuff to do so. You'll need the loot to rebuild.

 

[TheMightyQuinn]

unofficial offices of presidency has noted this novel suggestion of stealing little at a time. May we invite you to a consultant position especially considering that you are not likely to have job currently due to 'You know what'

DM if interested.

Who's "we" ?

 

[noxibox]

Thanks to God's Brett Herron for keeping the heat up.

I wouldn't consider him reliable either.

We are all presumed innocent but must use our own to maintain that presumption. Why must public representatives get the option of the public paying to defend them of charges that they stole from that very same public. In theory, the law is right to try prevent malicious persecution for political gain, but it needs to be more nuanced.

Though the astronomical cost mentioned in the article does prove once again that only the rich have a good chance of getting a fair hearing in court. Let's imagine she is wrongfully accused of a crime and wasn't a public official. Where would she find R500,000 to defend herself? And if she was stuck with a public defender or some other charity how much more likely is it that she'd end up going to jail for a crime she didn't commit?

You may be right to some extent. My thoughts on this are based on what people used to be paid say 60 years ago for being in Politics relative to other jobs at the time.

Maybe they weren't getting paid as much, but they were at least as corrupt. Taking the US as an example corruption was everywhere. Police, judges, prosecutors, politicians, basically pretty much any part of the state.

 

[sefeddt]

This whole thing could just backfire on those demanding her removal. I'm sure the DA have met with and spoken to her and based on that believe she has a strong case and not merely jumping to support her blindly.

 

[Numbie]

Taking the US as an example corruption was everywhere. Police, judges, prosecutors, politicians, basically pretty much any part of the state.

And the CDC?

 

[R13...]

I wouldn't consider him reliable either.


Though the astronomical cost mentioned in the article does prove once again that only the rich have a good chance of getting a fair hearing in court. Let's imagine she is wrongfully accused of a crime and wasn't a public official. Where would she find R500,000 to defend herself? And if she was stuck with a public defender or some other charity how much more likely is it that she'd end up going to jail for a crime she didn't commit?


Maybe they weren't getting paid as much, but they were at least as corrupt. Taking the US as an example corruption was everywhere. Police, judges, prosecutors, politicians, basically pretty much any part of the state.

Hey there's a good idea. Public officials must make use of public defenders like the long suffering voter who is saddled with public defenders when he can't afford lawyer's fees. Maybe then there'd be incentive to hire competent public defenders. The huge amounts they spend defending elected officials, litigating and defending various wrongs could be funneled toward building a capable public defense system.

 

[JuliusSeizure]

Something doesn't have to be wrong to be morally and ethically flawed. Zuma is also not doing anything wrong by frustrating the legal process to make sure he goes to the grave without ever accounting in court for his charges, it's all provided for in law.

And yes, Zuma is a perfect example to show just what a bunch of hypocrites they are.

It's also because of them that Steenhuisen's lack of education became exposed.

Some of their members tried to push for a motion to require leaders to have tertiary education (it was to take a swipe at Zuma but they didn't realize JS had no post high school qualification).

Their fans regularly call people out for mocking JS's lack of post school education but conveniently ignore that the DA shot themselves in the foot there. It would have not been an issue for anyone had they just shut up on that one.

 

[JuliusSeizure]

Doesn't matter who the politician is or which party it is, toss out the trash

They must all dissolve.

 

[surface]

It's also because of them that Steenhuisen's lack of education became exposed.

Some of their members tried to push for a motion to require leaders to have tertiary education (it was to take a swipe at Zuma but they didn't realize JS had no post high school qualification).

Their fans regularly call people out for mocking JS's lack of post school education but conveniently ignore that the DA shot themselves in the foot there. It would have not been an issue for anyone had they just shut up on that one.

You forget JS contribution in international crisis. If it wasn't for his diplomacy, Ukraine would be in tatters now. One should forget petty things like education etc. He speaks queen's English & looks presentable in suits - this will bring in investors when he becomes president. That is good enough for us.

 

[JuliusSeizure]

You forget JS contribution in international crisis. If it wasn't for his diplomacy, Ukraine would be in tatters now. One should forget petty things like education etc. He speaks queen's English & looks presentable in suits - this will bring in investors when he becomes president. That is good enough for us.

What did his trip even do other than just get himself likes on social media?

The funders should have rather sent relief to the people there. JS is no Mandela or Dalai Lama and it's not like people recognized him nor he made much of a difference.

 

[The Darkness]

City of Cape Town accused of forking out almost R500 000 for DA councillor Nora Grose's legal bill | News24

The City of Cape Town has reportedly splurged nearly R500 000 in legal fees for fraud-accused DA councillor Nora Grose.

www.news24.com

The City of Cape Town has stuck to its decision to pay the legal fees for fraud-accused councillor Nora Grose who faces charges of misappropriating City funds.

City council speaker Felicity Purchase declined to elaborate on the cost of Grose's legal fees

How can she decline to comment though. If our funds are used, they need to be answered for.
The DA has shown themselves up over the last few years. Exacerbated recently by their leader's callous and undignified remark towards the mother of his children on a podcast. How low can you go. Where are the real leaders? Why should we settle for someone with a matric and big mouth?

 

[R13...]

How can she decline to comment though. If our funds are used, they need to be answered for.
The DA has shown themselves up over the last few years. Exacerbated recently by their leader's callous and undignified remark towards the mother of his children on a podcast. How low can you go. Where are the real leaders? Why should we settle for someone with a matric and big mouth?

That podcast thing was very stupid. Trying to appear cool.