Zuma's sexual past in the dock?
2006-04-02 22:45
Katrien Smit, Beeld, and S'tembiso Msomi, City Press
Johannesburg - When former deputy president Jacob Zuma takes to the witness box to testify in his own defence, he probably will have to reveal his own sexual past - and also his HIV status, negative or positive.
And, Beeld's Katrien Smit reports that Professor Danie de Villiers, lecturer in criminal law at the University of Johannesburg, says Zuma could be looking at a five-year prison sentence if found guilty of rape.
Zuma is standing trial in Johannesburg High Court, charged with raping a 31-year-old, HIV-positive woman at his Forest Town house on November 2.
Beeld reports that Zuma's lawyer, Michael Hulley, has confirmed that the deputy president of the African National Congress probably will be the first witness called by the defence.
He said on Sunday that the defence team had decided late on Saturday what their strategy would be, but he could not talk about it.
It could be assumed, he said, that Zuma would be their first witness.
He said, too, that he could not comment on rumours that two of the planned defence witnesses could not be tracked down.
City Press reports that Zuma might have to reveal to the world his own HIV status - negative or positive - when he takes the stand.
Zuma will hold many facets of his future in his hands as he tells the court that the sex between himself and his accuser was consensual and that he had had no intention of harming her.
The prosecution is likely to ask why, if the sex was by agreement, he did not use a condom as he knew the complainant - dubbed Kwezhi (star) by women's-rights groups - to be HIV-positive.
The State may even ask him about his own HIV status.
Lawyer also in firing line
Zuma also possibly might have to explain why he "apologised" to the complainant's mother and was prepared "to pay compensation" if he knew that he had done nothing wrong.
His claim that the sex happened in his own bedroom also will be challenged as the woman had said it took place in the guestroom.
Another person likely to come under fire from the prosecution is Zuma's lawyer, Michael Hulley.
Judge Willem van der Merwe told Zuma on Thursday that a conviction on the evidence already led was possible, meaning his testimony this week will have to extricate him from conviction.
'Poor-quality evidence' rejected
But, judging by Judge Van der Merwe's remarks when he turned down the defence's application for the rape charge to be dropped, Zuma's acquittal effectively hinges on his own testimony.
The judge rejected the assertion by Zuma's counsel, Kemp J Kemp, that the State's evidence was of "such poor quality" that it would not have been enough to convict the former deputy president.
He said that, based on the State's evidence alone, the court could make a finding of mens rea (criminal intention) against Zuma.
Disputed evidence, given by police investigators, also indicated Zuma had "pointed out" the guestroom as "the alleged scene of the crime".
But, Kemp wants the police testimony to be ruled inadmissible as police procedures had not been followed when the "pointing out" apparently was done.
The judge said last week he would rule on the admissibility of the police evidence at the end of the trial.
Radio interview remarks
This means the defence might have to call Hulley as one of the witnesses to dispute the police testimony.
If Hulley takes the stand, he also might have to explain his remarks during a radio interview in which he had claimed not to know anything about the rape charge.
This was even though police already had been to see him and Zuma at the politician's traditional home in Inkandla, KwaZulu-Natal.
City Press understands that the defence's witness line-up includes Zuma's 22-year-old daughter Duduzile who was in the house on the night of November 2.
Others are a former ANC guerilla known as "Mashaya", believed to have been the accuser's ex-boyfriend, Durban church minister April Mbambo and a pyschologist.
Was dressed 'inappropriately'
Also on the list is one of two women who presided in an ANC "trial" of two men accused of raping the accuser when she was about 13 years old.
Duduzile is expected to tell the court that the accuser had come to her room on the night of the alleged rape and asked to be accompanied to the study where Zuma was working.
She would also tell the court that she believed the complainant was wearing only a kanga (wrap) without any underwear and that she had thought this was "inappropriate".
Duduzile also is expected to tell the court that she left the accuser alone with Zuma because she had wanted to speak to him privately.
"Mashaya" and the other witnesses who knew the accuser during their days in exile are expected to testify about her past claims of rape.
Church minister could be called
This, the defence hopes, will show the court that the woman had a history of making "false" rape claims.
Mbambo, who knew the woman as a member of his church in the mid-1990s, is expected to testify about how she had made claims of "attempted rape" after he had caught her and a young member of his parish about to engage in a sexual act.
He is expected to tell the court how the woman apparently had accused him of sexual assault after he rejected her initial rape story.