I never found a “generally corrupt relationship” between Zuma and Shaik

[kilo39]

Smoke and mirrors: all of us could swear we heard Squires use those words. It may be true that those are not in the judgement but Squires likely presented it as, "In my findings on Shaik I find a generally corrupt relationship" without getting into the long winding judgement.

Easy enough to verify; bit like Erwin, lie, double-lie and triple-lie but he has yet to be held to account.

 

[Angelo]

What was the source of this and why was it propagated so widely without any journalistic due diligence being applied to check if it was actually true?

I think you will find your answer in this statement issued by Mr Zuma:

"It is now well known that the investigation and campaign against me was supported by regular leaks of information to the media, and intense lobbying of the media for support," he said.

"Through this, they created a culture of Zuma bashing."

There has definitely been an anti-Zuma campaign and a lot of people who should know better have gullibly lapped it up.

 

[Syndyre]

There has definitely been an anti-Zuma campaign and a lot of people who should know better have gullibly lapped it up.

I wouldn't normally agree with you but the fact that all the media mysteriously settled on one rather convenient sound bite that doesn't seem to have come from any actual judgement or judicial statement is rather suspicious.

 

[AirWolf]

But the bottom line IMO is that one statement by Squires (or prosecutor) did not lead to the conviction of Schabir Shaik but the conviction was supported by other evidence as well. The next thing that comes up is that if someone is guilty of giving a bribe someone else must be guilty of accepting a bribe so the whole issue seems unjust.

(I too could have sworn I heard the words "...generally corrupt relationship..." come out of the mouth of Squires)

Edit: But then again perception is reality.

 

[Jongi]

I think it can be said (no matter whether you think Zuma is guilty or not) that the media has ever only put across one image of Zuma. That being said, if you had to ask me whether I heard Squires say those words I would have said yes. Maybe someone has the Shaik judgement on their PVR/VHS/Betamax and can report.

 

[Syndyre]

Perhaps it was a statement made by him outside the actual judgement and so not recorded in the transcript? Don't know why he would deny saying it though. Emailed the BBC to ask what they based it on since it's in all their reports, now lets hope they actually respond.

 

[kilo39]

I await E's replaying of the tape (am only surprised it hasn't happened yet.)

Fact is: it is all irrelevant - Zuma is no less guilty now than he was then. The statement summarises the judgement; it is not of it.

 

[Getafix]

I wouldn't normally agree with you but the fact that all the media mysteriously settled on one rather convenient sound bite that doesn't seem to have come from any actual judgement or judicial statement is rather suspicious.

Exactly, a convenient soundbite. No more, no less.

Angelo, conveniently goes the conspiracy way.

Why doesnt he quote the fullbank. Shabir couldn't aford to give money away and Zuma couldn't borrow money any more.

But why spoil a good story with the full truth.

 

[kilo39]

"His corporate empire's progress and prosperity was plainly linked to the possibility that Jacob Zuma would finally ascend to the highest political office. What was important to him was the achievement of a large multi-corporate business group ... And the power that goes with that and close association with the greatest in the land. It is precisely in such circumstances that corruption works".
-
-
Judge Squires dismissed Shaik's anti-apartheid "struggle credentials", saying what he had sought to achieve was exactly the same as the apartheid regime's "command of the economy" by a privileged few, which is exactly what the struggle had sought to replace.
-
-
"I do not think I am overstating anything when I say that this phenomenon [of corruption] can truly be likened to a cancer eating away remorselessly at the fabric of corporate privacy and extending its baleful effect into all aspects of administrative functions, whether state official or private sector manager. If it is not checked, it becomes systemic. And the after-effects of systemic corruption can quite readily extend to the corrosion of any confidence in the integrity of anyone who has a duty to discharge, especially a duty to discharge to the public."
"One can hopefully discount the prospect of it happening in this country, but it is that sort of increasing disaffection which leads and has led on other parts of our continent and elsewhere to coups d'état or the rise of populace leaders who in turn manipulate politics for even greater private benefit ... This is the last step in a thousand mile journey."
[wikipedia]

 

[Freshy-ZN]

I still will put my doodah on a block and say i heard Squires speak the exact words "...a generally corrupt relationship..."existed between Saik and Zuma.

 

[Jam]

Squires is quite right

I still will put my doodah on a block and say i heard Squires speak the exact words "...a generally corrupt relationship..."existed.

Thine Doodah is gone! Off with the Doodah!

Please people, this was the PROSECUTION, ie. Billy Downer. Just because the prosecution is State-appointed and the Judge is State-appointed, people (reporters and public) think they are on the 'same side' against Shaik!

From the Cape Times; Date 2005-04-26; Reporter, Estelle Ellis
via http://www.armsdeal-vpo.co.za/articles07/zuma_breached.html

>>"In closing argument before Justice Hilary Squires, prosecution leader Billy Downer, SC, said the evidence led had shown Zuma as having agreed to "corrupt patronage" with Shaik, knowing that if he stopped helping Shaik, his personal financial situation would be in jeopardy."

>>Downer spent much time dealing with the makings of what he labelled a "generally corrupt relationship" between Shaik and Zuma."

These are quotes that this reporter wrote down!

And some other reports say "generally corrupt relationship" that the COURT found....blah blah.
This means the COURT, not the JUDGE saying it in his judgement. ie. Downer's lengthy prosecution speech etc, even quoting Latin verses.

This term arose in the papers even before the final judgement was delivered!
see: http://www.armsdeal-vpo.co.za/articles09/court_bid.html

Also: http://www.armsdeal-vpo.co.za/articles07/final_argument.html
"The first corruption charge relates to his long-standing friendship with Deputy President Jacob Zuma, whom he also serves as financial adviser. The PROSECUTION DESCRIBED this relationship as "generally corrupt" and said Shaik used his connections with Zuma to secure business deals. In turn he allegedly financed Zuma's expensive lifestyle."

 

[jontyB]

And this is the reason why all court proceedings in the public interest should be held with public attendance, and that recording equipment should be par for the course.

 

[Albereth]

So if he did say it and now denies it, and someone produces a recording of it has he committed perjury? And if he continues to deny it even if that is the court record is he in contempt of court.

I'd give him the benefit of the doubt and really look at what the newspapers were told and what they heard being two different things - and it wouldn't be the first time.

 

[chiskop]

No, He (Squires, at least) didn't say it.

It seems like the phrase was first used by the prosecution and then picked up by journalists because it was pithy and succinct.

There is no question of perjury - perhaps misreporting or lazy attribution.

 

[surface]

Cosatu says appeal judges should resign

http://www.mg.co.za/articlePage.aspx?articleid=289725&area=/breaking_news/breaking_news__national/

-----

Why do I have the vague suspicion that Zwelinzima Vavi must be under constant influence of dagga?

 

[BTTB]

Cosatu says appeal judges should resign

http://www.mg.co.za/articlePage.aspx?articleid=289725&area=/breaking_news/breaking_news__national/

-----

Why do I have the vague suspicion that Zwelinzima Vavi must be under constant influence of dagga?

That in itself is a ludicrous statement.
Perhaps we should ask Cosatu if they actually said those words or once again were misquoted, or taken out of context by The Media as was The Lower Court of Judge Squires?

Think of the complications of all the Appeal Court Judges resigning?
The Appeals Court in Bloemfontein and The Constitutional Court are the 2 Courts we can trust, as many poor and bad decisions are made in the lower courts and it is these courts that can remedy the situation, albeit a long, expensive and tedious exercise.
I would be very surprised if COSATU unilaterally made these statements.
Could be one of the leaders either taking it on himself to remark on things he knows little about or as I stated they/he/she could have been misquoted.

I really don't care any more.
I am sick and tired of hearing Zuma this and Zuma that.
Like a stuck record harping the same tune over and over again.
The Media can really be pathetic. Where do these Journalists get their qualifications from if they have any at all?

What could have happened in the Lower Court at the time of Squires Judgement was that the Media planted those words deliberately.
It may be an extreme statement to make, but then all is not well in this country.
For all we know one or more Journalists were enrolled to defame Zuma so that the Ruling Party could get rid of The Zulu in their midst.
People under estimate the Zulu/Xhosa thing.

 

[BTTB]

'Generally corrupt' not in judgment - SCA

'Generally corrupt' not in judgment - SCA

 

[chiskop]

The Media can really be pathetic. Where do these Journalists get their qualifications from if they have any at all?

Well, I got mine from Wits, and Rhodes is another popular choice.

I think, that you underestimate the pressure under which many journalists work, especially in the daily media. Most people having the luxury of being able to hide their mistakes, journalists publish theirs.

Yes, it is a mistake, and it is regrettable, but I can see how it happens.

It really is not a big deal - it's just complicated by having Vavi making a meal of it.

I really don't care any more.
I am sick and tired of hearing Zuma this and Zuma that.
Like a stuck record harping the same tune over and over again.

I think that it is becoming impossible to have a sensible conversation when that man's name crops up. Everyone has an opinion, a conspiracy theory and a prepared knee-jerk response. Common sense flies out the window. See the Loose Canon thread for more details.

 

[BTTB]

Well, I got mine from Wits, and Rhodes is another popular choice.

I think, that you underestimate the pressure under which many journalists work, especially in the daily media. Most people having the luxury of being able to hide their mistakes, journalists publish theirs.

Yes, it is a mistake, and it is regrettable, but I can see how it happens.

It really is not a big deal - it's just complicated by having Vavi making a meal of it.



I think that it is becoming impossible to have a sensible conversation when that man's name crops up. Everyone has an opinion, a conspiracy theory and a prepared knee-jerk response. Common sense flies out the window. See the Loose Canon thread for more details.

Hi Chiskop

You are right in your summation.
One shouldn't make blanket statements about certain fraternities abilities.
Sorry if I offended you in any way?

However one cannot help but mention how The Media has made Zuma what he is today? The constant blow by blow accounts of Zuma's life ad infinitum is bordering on nausea.

One wonders what Vavi's aspirations are in the political arena?
Looks like he wants to migrate to politics?
The reports in The Media of late from Vavi are more political than labour orientated although in many aspects they are related.

 

[chiskop]

[ BTTB, No offense taken ]

I heard Anton Harber saying on SAfm this morning that this was not the first time that Squires has pointed out the error - that he'd sent various journo's and editors letters previously. If it is the case the the error continued, uncorrected, after having been pointed out, well, that's obviously a different situation.

Vavi is a politician - no two ways about that.