[DEBATE] : Re: Too bad Zuma didn't drown in the shower
tshankimahlangu at yahoo.com
Fri Apr 7 07:35:31 BST 2006
The law prohibits questions on the complainant's
sexual history, unless the judge grants special
permission. Zuma's team applied for permission, which
was granted. Neither the judge nor the prosecutor
objected to the questions. The only people who
complained are ideologues who would want to see rape
convictions sky rocket.
Or would you prefer a blanket, no- exceptions-allowed
prohibition, as neofeminists demand? Even if the
complainant has a history of accusing no less than 6
people of rape? Only in feminist utopia.
--- mfleshman at aol.com wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Mahlangu <tshankimahlangu at yahoo.com>
> To: debate at lists.kabissa.org
> Sent: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 01:06:16 -0700 (PDT)
> Subject: [DEBATE] : Re: Too bad Zuma didn't drown in
> the shower
> what is happening is in accordance with the law.
> Rather like apartheid, eh Peter? Or the Holocaust,
> or slavery or Jim
> Crow. All in accordance with "the law."
> Very principled stand you've adopted.
> The rest of your posting is too debased and
> misogynst and bizarre for
> DEBATE mailing list
> DEBATE at lists.kabissa.org
More information about the Debate-list