UCT Shackville protesters effectively expelled

Alex Hotz (ninth respondent):

4. Applicant alleged that ninth respondent was seen walking in Residence Road after alighting from her car, carrying a tyre to the area where protesters had already made the fire that was used to burn paintings and photographs.
65. Ninth respondent's answer to the allegation is that there is nothing illegal about carrying a tyre.
66. In its replying affidavit, applicant alleges that ninth respondent drove a car that transported three tyres onto campus.
67. Another student was allegedly seen alighting from ninth respondent's car with a red Castrol can that later contained approximately 3 litres of petrol.
68. The circumstantial evidence points to ninth respondent's direct involvement in facilitating the lighting of fires and consequently the burning of artwork on campus.
69. Ninth respondent offers no plausible explanation for bringing a tyre to the fire.
70. Ninth respondent justifies the fire as follows: "From what I saw the fire had been made to prevent the movement of cars into the vicinity of Residence Road." It is an astounding allegation. She attempts to legitimise the making of a fire to block vehicular traffic. The allegation demonstrates a gross failure to appreciate that a fire usually destroys the property on which it is made and has the potential to harm nearby vehicles, persons, buildings and its contents. No explanation is given on how the protesters could unilaterally arrogate to themselves, the power to block vehicular access to a road.
71. Ninth respondent does not explain why she "dropped the tyre where students were singing and dancing" yet she alleged that it was not used to burn anything.
Click to expand...

Thirteenth respondent:

93. Thirteenth respondent is accused of wearing a t-shirt with the following words written on it: "Kill All Whites."
94. Thirteenth respondent alleges that the words were preceded by a small almost illegible "s", thereby denoting the following words ostensibly: "sKill All Whites."
95. Firstly, there is no known campaign being waged by protesters to have all white persons skilled. Secondly, there is no logical reason why the "s" would be written much smaller than the rest of the words if such a campaign indeed existed. Thirdly, thirteenth respondent ought to take responsibility for his actions in an open and transparent manner instead of disingenuously attempting to cast doubt on his intention when he chose to wear a sweater with the said words on it, in the midst of protest action.
Click to expand...
 
93. Thirteenth respondent is accused of wearing a t-shirt with the following words written on it: "Kill All Whites."
94. Thirteenth respondent alleges that the words were preceded by a small almost illegible "s", thereby denoting the following words ostensibly: "sKill All Whites."
95. Firstly, there is no known campaign being waged by protesters to have all white persons skilled. Secondly, there is no logical reason why the "s" would be written much smaller than the rest of the words if such a campaign indeed existed. Thirdly, thirteenth respondent ought to take responsibility for his actions in an open and transparent manner instead of disingenuously attempting to cast doubt on his intention when he chose to wear a sweater with the said words on it, in the midst of protest action.
Click to expand...

:D :D
 
They love to show off their martyrdom in social media but this judgement clearly shows them to be the snivelling cowards we all knew they were.

These idiots like to give required readings to people, perhaps this should be added to the list.
 
grantza said:
next thing terms like "martyrs" will used by the current pseudo militant single brain cell uni community.
Click to expand...

:whistle:

CiQHjlNUoAANQcM.jpg
 
They are good anc cadres who will be employed by them.
No problem.
They need this on their political cv.
 
I'm all for students being involved in causes and protesting. There was however never any justification for the destruction of property.

ellyally said:
Good, but I feel more destruction will now take place demanding they return
Click to expand...
Then kick them out too.
 
93. Thirteenth respondent is accused of wearing a t-shirt with the following words written on it: "Kill All Whites."
94. Thirteenth respondent alleges that the words were preceded by a small almost illegible "s", thereby denoting the following words ostensibly: "sKill All Whites."
95. Firstly, there is no known campaign being waged by protesters to have all white persons skilled. Secondly, there is no logical reason why the "s" would be written much smaller than the rest of the words if such a campaign indeed existed. Thirdly, thirteenth respondent ought to take responsibility for his actions in an open and transparent manner instead of disingenuously attempting to cast doubt on his intention when he chose to wear a sweater with the said words on it, in the midst of protest action.
Click to expand...

Oh geez... lols. Just shows the mentality of this lot.
 
Good.

They can cry all they want - but if you can't protest in a civilised manner then you need to pay the price, simple as that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X