Judge turns to State witnesses

2006-05-08 12:38

Johannesburg - Testimony by State witnesses in the Jacob Zuma rape trial was briefly referred to by Judge Willem van der Merwe while he was delivering his judgment in the Johannesburg High Court on Monday.

He gave summaries of what he believed was important to the case.

Commissioner Norman Taioe, head of Gauteng detective services, and Superintendent Peter Linda, the investigating officer, testified that Zuma had pointed out the guest bedroom in his Johannesburg home when asked to show them the "alleged scene of the crime".

They also testified that, when Zuma was asked what happened in his bedroom, he replied "nothing".

Although Taioe told the court he considered this important, he forgot to write it in his statement on the matter.

Zuma, 64, is accused of raping a 31-year-old HIV-positive woman in the guest bedroom on November 2 last year. Zuma says the two had consensual sex in his bedroom.

Taioe also said he only learnt in court that Zuma said they had sex in his bedroom.

Underneath photos of some rooms of the house, the guest bedroom is labelled as the guest bedroom, and not the crime scene, van der Merwe said.

Taioe told the court he did not warn Zuma of his rights again when they went to his Johannesburg home because his attorney Michael Hulley was present all the time, and he had been warned during a visit at his Nkandla hone in KwaZulu-Natal.

Zuma's lawyer Kemp J Kemp has asked Van der Merwe that some evidence presented by the two policemen be declared inadmissible.

He accused them of not following basic police procedure and Zuma denied that he pointed out the guest bedroom and that he said nothing happened in his bedroom.

Legal assistance

Lawyer Yusuf Dockrat said in his testimony that he met with the complainant and her mother because he was told the accuser needed some legal assistance.

He said the meeting started with a general discussion about the case, legal procedure and the role the media would play.

The withdrawal of the matter was also discussed and it was decided that the complainant would think about it.

Van der Merwe next touched upon the testimony of virologist Dr Desmond James Martin.

He said it could be deduced from Martin's research that "HIV is a terrible infection that one should not take chances with".

Van der Merwe went on to discuss the application by the defence to discharge the case on the grounds that intent to rape had not been presented and proven.

He quoted extensively from case law and international laws, as well as past and present South African legislation.

He looked at different definitions of rape and said one of the questions was whether it could be rape if the man in question did not know that the woman had not consented.

He said some of the reasons why he could not agree to discharge the case was that there was merit in the victim's suggestion that she froze when she saw Zuma naked.

He said there could also have been intent, since the victim testified that Zuma was already naked when she woke up.

Judgment continues.

- SAPA