Justice for the rich?
Fred has been found not guilty … at a cost. Reports are that his family spent R9 - 10 million to prove it to the court.
They brought in four expert witnesses from around the world, had a team of attorneys and lawyers, private investigators and miscellaneous other expenses. It is no wonder that the cost was so high. After all, what loving parent would not pay everything they had to ensure their child had the best defence possible?
Fred is lucky. He comes from a section of the population that has access to this kind of money. I can’t but help thinking of the millions of other South Africans who do not have access to the same defence as Fred did. Do they get a fair shot at proving their innocence?
Without a good defence, the police have carte blanche in manufacturing evidence, presenting flimsy evidence before the court and/or not bothering with a good investigation. When this repetitively happens, they are exposed as incompetent when someone with money stands up to them - as in this case.
An additional problem is that Legal Aid is so overworked that they probably can not give each case the full attention that it deserves. Added to this are the budget restraints. Would Legal Aid spend millions to bring the best possible witnesses to court? Would they even bother with getting local experts?
The result is a badly defended case and a high probability that the defendant will end up being imprisoned for a crime they did not commit. In our prisons there could be thousands of innocent people who have been wrongly accused and convicted but without the financial means to prove it.
Louis van der Vyver is probably going to sue the police to recoup some of his losses. But also, in his words:
“Having endured what we did, we’ve got a tremendous sensitivity about what this could do to any other person. We would like to do whatever we can to address the [problems in the] system and prevent or limit such a thing happening to anybody else.”
I applaud that he draws attention to this problem. Yet shouldn’t we as a society be doing more?
I feel very strongly that it is high time that the government takes a very close look into the workings of the police, NPA, Legal Aid and the convictions of people currently in prison. Similar action has taken place in the UK over the past several years, resulting in quite a number of convictions being declared ‘unsafe’ and subsequently being quashed.
It is about time we had reform in all aspects of the criminal justice system in South Africa. Maybe then we can live in a law-abiding country! Maybe then people will respect the legal system.
I will end this article with a couple of famous quotes:
It is far better that ten guilty persons escape than one innocent suffer
-Sir William Blackstone
Laws grind the poor, and rich men rule the law
-Oliver Goldsmith
The jury, passing on the prisoners life, may, in the sworn twelve have a thief or two guiltier than him they try
-William Shakespeare, Measure for Measure
Related Posts:
Loading ...
December 6th, 2007 at 8:33 am
Annother related article in today’s paper:
SA’s criminal justice system is in crisis.
By Waghied Misbach
The criminal justice sector is in a crisis because of poor management by Cabinet and the Presidency and needs a major overhaul, according to a discussion document released by the Democratic Alliance (DA) in Parliament on Monday.
The overview looking at performance and administration is based on the last three years’ yearly reports of the safety and security, the correctional services and the justice and constitutional development departments.
It was released jointly by the DA’s safety and security spokesman Dianne Kohler Barnard and the correctional services spokesman Rafeek Shah.
“The criminal justice system is in a crisis,” according to the document released by Shah and Kohler Barnard.
“The DA’s analysis reveals that there are, indeed, substantial problems with South Africa’s criminal justice system in general and with the three core departments which comprise it in particular.
“The fact that there are clearly major recurring issues from year to year, speaks directly to the failure to place correctly-skilled and experienced people in key positions.
There are serious problems across the board with a shortage of skilled and experienced staff as well as a failure to implement systems that manage performance,” they stated.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:56 am
I think a lot of people are now questioning the justice system following this trial and several other ’scandals’. Whether the government will do anything though is anyones guess!
December 6th, 2007 at 9:01 am
Please remember that you can also use the Forum to make conversation threads. Most people should be able to use their same username and password to access it.
You can click on the ‘Forum’ link above to access the main page, or you can click on the comments in the right hand column to access a specific section.
It may be better to hold the general discussions there and keep these comments restricted to the topic of the post.
The forum will allow you to create your own threads in the different categories, so people with similar interests can have their own threads.
If you are not automatically logged in to the forum and it rejects your username and password, then you may need to create a new account there. It is a problem with the software integration.
December 6th, 2007 at 9:23 am
Aangesien daar so n fonds is, sal die Lotz-gesin en die Van der Vyver-gesin nie n ondersoek loods d.m.v. die media en n beloning aanbied nie?
Mens sou verwag dat die koerante al hoofopskrifte sou gehad het met die ” BELONING AANGEBIED” op die voorblaaie van sulks.
December 6th, 2007 at 9:30 am
Welkom terug Yolande!
Sommige mense sê die gemis is die heel ergste na drie jaar! Ek hoop die Lotze kry baie liefde en ondersteuning hierdie Kersfees.
Is daar dalk enige ’cause’ wat hulle graag sou wou hê ons moet ondersteun ter nagedagtenis aan Inge?
December 6th, 2007 at 9:33 am
Continuing on some of the comments on the previous thread relating to Werner Carolus’ possible involvement…
He and his “gabbas” look like real drug “skollies”, if one looks at the quotes of what De Villiers and Trollip said about him in court.
What was the police’s explanation of why Carolus would do something like this?
One aspect that bothers me is that he started crying and shaking during his pointing-out on 21 April 2005. Apparently he could not do the pointing out and then the next day he took them to the complex and to the entrance of flats 17 – 24. Inge’s flat was number 21, which I imagine one would reach by taking the entrance “17 – 24”.
Furthermore Eggie says that his cellphone plotting registered in Okiep. Is that right? It would be interesting to know with which cellphone company he had a contract because I don’t think Vodacom has any, at least not good, coverage in Okiep.
Eiertjie, you seem to know, with which cellphone company did Carolus have a contract?
December 6th, 2007 at 9:44 am
Sorry Twenty20
The last time I tried sending you a link to an article you enquired about, you were quite rude…
(I might forgive you if you apologize though)
December 6th, 2007 at 9:48 am
Alex, ek volg al geruime tyd hierdie blog, maar jou voorstel is die beste voorstel wat ek nog op hierdie blog gelees het, dalk sal daar dan dinge uitkom wat in die hofsaak moes uitgekom het.
Defnitief nie ‘n PEA BRAIN jy nie.
Kom met nog POSITIWE voorstelle tevoorskyn.
Asseblief.
December 6th, 2007 at 9:51 am
Aan almal wat steeds glo Fred is skuldig, dit is julle goeie reg en niemand het die gesag om julle daarvan te probeer ontneem nie. Maar ek vra rêrig mooi, kom ons almal probeer die saak ontrafel, sonder om Fred oor en oor te herverhoor. Onthou, dit is julle wat nie kon wag vir die uitspraak van die briljante regter en sy twee bekwame assessore nie. Aanvaar dat hy die regte besluit geneem het met die inligting tot sy beskikking; en moenie vergeet dat die uitspraak eenparig was en Fred as ‘n goeie getuie bestempel is.
As julle meen daar was inligting wat nie voor die hof beland het nie, en wat tot Fred se skuldigbevinding kon lei, moet julle vra waarom dit nie gedoen is nie. As gekyk word na staatsgetuies wat bereid was om te getuig, maar nie deur die staat geroep is nie, en verklarings wat op die laaste nippertjie op die verdediging se aandrag ingedien is, dan is die antwoord duidelik : die staat het geen verdere getuienis gehad wat sy saak kon versterk nie, inteendeel. En indien dit wel die geval sou wees, het niemand meer mag as die staat om dit wel voor die hof te bring nie.
Glo julle regtig die Polisie en die Vervolgingsgesag sou al die kritiek van die regter en die publiek goedsmoeds verduur, terwyl hulle dit kon verhoed het? Die leuen wat in die hof ontbloot is, was die staat se weergawe van gebeure, nie Fred s’n nie. Die regter het Fred nie ‘n leuenaar genoem nie. Die enkele punte van Fred se getuienis waarop die regter kritiek gehad het, het hy self opgeklaar deur na dit te verwys as blote oordrywings, of dat dit geen wesenlike invloed op die verloop van sake gehad het nie. Kom ons aanvaar die regbank (drie persone) se bevindings, al is dit hoe moeilik vir julle. As dit dan nie uit respek vir Fred is nie, dan wel vir die regter en sy twee assessore.
Sakkie, as jy aanhou verwys na Fred se leuens in die hof, en jy verkies om nie die regbank se beslissing daaroor te aanvaar nie, moet dit dan nie net laat by verdere verdagmakery nie. Spel uit wat die leuens is, wat die betekenis daarvan is, en hoe dit tot ‘n ander beslissing kon gelei het. Dan sal ek jou gelyk gee dat die oplossing van die moord jou dryfveer is en nie jou haat vir die Van der Vyvers nie. Anders is jy ‘n patetiese verloorder wat nie jou pak kan vat nie. Dit geld ook vir die ander wat aanhou asof daar nie ‘n hofsaak en ‘n uitspraak was nie.
Yolandi, ek het nie anders van jou verwag as dat jy steeds sal glo Fred is skuldig nie, maar ek het ‘n groot probleem met jou uitspraak dat die “oorgrote deel van die mensdom” ook so glo. Genugtig, hoe het jy aan hierdie verstommende gevolgtrekking gekom? Gaan kyk weer na die publiek se reaksie op Die Burger se webtuiste na die hofuitspraak. Dit is wel nie verteenwoordigend van die “mensdom” nie, maar dit wys die teendeel van wat jy sê. Dit is vergrype soos hierdie Yolandi, wat jou kritiek op die hals haal. As jy dit vertolk as pogings om jou te verhinder om vir jouself te dink en jou mening te gee, is jy maar in dieselfde sinkende bootjie as Sakkie en sommige ander.
Ek stem nie saam dat moontlike verdagtes se name hier genoem word nie. Dit sal onbillik wees, indien nie lasterlik nie. Tog glo ek dat sommige van ons wel mense in gedagte het wat ondersoek behoort te word. So glo ek steeds dat as die moordenaar/s nie Carolus en/of van sy bendelede is nie, dit een van ‘n klein groepie mense is met wie Inge noue bande gehad het, en dat die motief iets met jaloesie te doen het. Ek het ‘n “gut feel” dat ons nie lank gaan wag vir verdere verwikkelinge nie.
Ek sal nie verbaas wees as private speurders alreeds weer met die saak doenig is nie.
Vaalseun en Seeman, ag, moenie so kwaad word en lelik praat nie - dis nie die moeite werd nie. Kom óns probeer om kalm, die stryd om menslikheid voort te stry. Ek het begrip ……
December 6th, 2007 at 9:55 am
…but here is some of your own advice, if you’d like to follow it
“150
Twenty20 Says:
December 5th, 2007 at 3:58 pm
vroteiertjie: tik in google in tik in google in tik in google in tik in google in tik in google in tik in google in tik in google in tik in google in tik in google in tik”