Zuma reinstated as ANC deputy president

Vrotappel

Bulls fan
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Messages
19,343
JQ is obviously pretty biased in his opinion regarding JZ. He founds him not guilty on the corruption allegation even before the court case starts.
 

icyrus

Executive Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2005
Messages
8,609
There are obviously a few zuma supporters on this board - would any of you mind sharing with us why you support him? It would be enlightening for us all I think.
 

KillerX

Expert Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2005
Messages
1,109
I cant wait for him to be found guilty on the corruption charges. And for all the zuma supporters to shut the hell up. I think Zuma is a total idiot, and lets pray to God that monkey doesnt become president of South Africa. If that happens, things in South Africa will become like Zimbabwe.
 

3Gee

Expert Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2005
Messages
2,614
@ Killerx ,The U.S has not become a Zimbabwe , I am not a Zuma supporter but if there are no grounds to prevent him from being re instated the ANC has no choice but to give his job back ,the biggest problem is that the State did not have a strong case against him .
 

Angelo

Expert Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2006
Messages
1,786
Dominic Rooney said:
Hopefully this is only a temporary solution since his corruption trial is coming up and he's clearly guilty on that charge.
Are you repeating the mistake of judging him before the actual trial?
 

Rkootknir

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2005
Messages
1,120
Angelo said:
Are you repeating the mistake of judging him before the actual trial?
This is what I don't understand (and why I think JQ's little rant is totally justified).

No trial has yet occurred. As such the accused is considered completely innocent of any wrongdoing. During the trial it is the job of the prosecution to provide sufficient evidence that a crime actually took place. The accused then has an opportunity to defend himself. After hearing both arguments the judge can issue a verdict.

As far as I know no corruption trial has yet taken place? No evidence has been presented. No defence has taken place. No verdict has been made.

Any statement as to his guilt (regarding corruption) is utterly irrelevant and meaningless at present.
 

Angelo

Expert Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2006
Messages
1,786
Rkootknir said:
This is what I don't understand (and why I think JQ's little rant is totally justified).

No trial has yet occurred. As such the accused is considered completely innocent of any wrongdoing. During the trial it is the job of the prosecution to provide sufficient evidence that a crime actually took place. The accused then has an opportunity to defend himself. After hearing both arguments the judge can issue a verdict.

As far as I know no corruption trial has yet taken place? No evidence has been presented. No defence has taken place. No verdict has been made.

Any statement as to his guilt (regarding corruption) is utterly irrelevant and meaningless at present.
100% correct.
 

Padded Mouse

Expert Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2005
Messages
1,148
Dominic Rooney said:
Hopefully this is only a temporary solution since his corruption trial is coming up and he's clearly guilty on that charge.

do you really think he will be convicted whether he is guilty or not? Will have to be a very brave judge. And anyway, there are already rumours that they won't be ready for trial in July and that his defence will use this as an excuse for dismissal on the grounds that the delay will prejudice his right to a "fair" trial!

Fair ??? funny word to use when speaking of him!
 

lilDeath

Executive Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2006
Messages
6,231
.geek said:
What a simply stunning reputation and role model for a deputy president.
Ye, I MUST agree, stunning individual to have as our Deputy President. Great example to the people. Great !
Frackin NOT!! :mad:

Like Padded Mouse says, I also think it will have to be a brave judge to find him guilty.
In fact, it might even be why the judge for the rape trial did not find him guilty, due to fear, especially looking at how the poor accuser was victimised. Imagine if Zuma was found guilty ....
 

craigsa

Executive Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2005
Messages
5,207
Angelo said:
Are you repeating the mistake of judging him before the actual trial?
Yes as he was found to share a "genreally corrupt" relationship with Shaiky waiky therefore he is guilty. Corruption involves 2 or more parties.
 

.geek

Expert Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2005
Messages
3,622
lilDeath said:
Ye, I MUST agree, stunning individual to have as our Deputy President. Great example to the people. Great !
Frackin NOT!! :mad:
Yeah. :(
 

KillerX

Expert Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2005
Messages
1,109
craigsa said:
Yes as he was found to share a "genreally corrupt" relationship with Shaiky waiky therefore he is guilty. Corruption involves 2 or more parties.
EXACTLY! If shaiks relationship with Zuma was corrupt, and Shaik was guilty of paying Zuma, then Zuma is guilting in accepting the money. End of Story! It takes 2 to tango.

There is no way he can be innocent! But they will appeal and drag this thing on for years.
 

Angelo

Expert Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2006
Messages
1,786
KillerX said:
EXACTLY! If shaiks relationship with Zuma was corrupt, and Shaik was guilty of paying Zuma, then Zuma is guilting in accepting the money. End of Story! It takes 2 to tango.

There is no way he can be innocent! But they will appeal and drag this thing on for years.
remains to be seen, do you know that you could be prosecuted for making such pronouncements on a sub-judice matter, contempt of court ring a bell?
 

craigsa

Executive Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2005
Messages
5,207
Blah blah blah Angelo, it does not remain to be seen it is fact!! Read the judgement handed down to Shaik.
 

Chris_the_Brit

High Tory
Joined
Mar 6, 2004
Messages
31,377
Yeah, hence the reason for my statement. If Shaik = corrupt, then so is JZ as you need 2 people to be corrupt.
 

kilo39

Executive Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2005
Messages
5,425
remains to be seen, do you know that you could be prosecuted for making such pronouncements on a sub-judice matter, contempt of court ring a bell?
This is a public forum - our opinions are still our own (notwithstanding the most recent clampdown by government on Free Speech.)
 
Top