Duduzane Zuma has had his trial for culpable homicide postponed on Thursday, as the court ended proceedings for the next few weeks. All parties will return to Randburg on 20 June for the closing arguments.
It’s likely that the son of former President Jacob Zuma will sleep a little easier tonight, as well. Thursday saw testimony from both a credible eyewitness and vehicle accident specialist, which both aided the defence of Duduzane Zuma. Given that he could face jail time on these current charges, this was just the ticket for the businessman.
Defence present their arguments for Duduzane Zuma
Kondrad Lotter is a reconstruction expert, and he spoke in favour of Duduzane’s version of events when the defence presented their case. He suggested that Zuma was doing no more than 87 – 89km/h on the night his Porsche slammed into the back of a taxi, killing a young woman and injuring three other people.
This is consistent with the speed Zuma Jnr has previously claimed he was doing (90 – 100km/h) on that fateful night. He has insisted he was well under the speed limit, given the treacherous weather conditions.
- Lotter also established “both vehicles were doing less than the speed limit”.
- He bolstered Duduzane’s claims that the Porsche had aqua-planed, saying it was a “plausible” explanation.
- The expert confirmed the weather was partially at fault for the incident.
Eyewitness offers Zuma Jnr “a lifeline”
After Lotter had been cross-examined, eyewitness Michael Jankelowitz was asked to share his version of events. He says he saw the accident happen as he drove alongside the vehicles, but denied that speeding or “reckless driving” was a factor that caused this fatal collision.
“Traffic was slow because of the rain. The speed [of Duduzane’s car] was not excessive at all in my opinion. I had time to see the number plate. It was not flying past me. A few days later to my shock I heard on 702 about the accident. I called in because they were exaggerating. They said the Porsche was racing “
Duduzane Zuma trial latest: What happens next?
Jankelowitz was then grilled about why he contacted the attorneys for Duduzane Zuma, rather than the state with this information. The witness maintained that he was just looking to “tell the truth to the right people”.
Upon the resumption of the case next month, it will be the prosecution’s turn. They will attempt to discredit this version of events and bring their own experts in to try and secure a conviction against Duduzane, more than five years after the crash occurred.