NPA let Duduzane off the hook
Original accident sketch, statement went missing
The National Prosecuting Authority quietly let President Jacob Zuma’s son Duduzane Zuma off the hook eight months after a magistrate ruled he was responsible for the death of a young woman in a car crash.
Despite the high-profile nature of the case, the NPA has never publicly announced its decision, but it has emerged in correspondence in the leaked Gupta e-mails which The Times has obtained.
Randburg magistrate Lalitha Chetty ruled on December 11 2014 that Zuma was negligent when the Porsche he was driving collided with a taxi on the M1 highway.
Two women who were travelling in the taxi died. Phumzile Dube, 30, died at the scene, while Jeanette Mashaba died in hospital a few weeks after the crash.
Mashaba’s death was ruled a result of natural causes.
Zuma maintained his car hit a puddle of water and he lost control, veering into the taxi, which in turn smashed into the barrier.
Shortly after the accident, the NPA decided for the first time not to prosecute based on the existing, insufficient evidence and referred the case to a magistrate’s court for a formal inquest.
Chetty found “the death of the deceased Phumzile Dube was prima facie brought about by the negligent act of suspect 2, Mr Zuma”.
“He failed to conduct himself in a reasonable manner under the circumstances and adverse weather conditions,” she said.
Chetty rejected Zuma’s defence that his car had “aquaplaned” in water because he had admitted to speeding up to overtake a car that was splashing water on his car’s windscreen.
She said he should have slowed down taking into account the heavy rain falling at the time of the crash.
Leaked e-mails revealed that on August 18 2015, a notification was sent to Zuma’s lawyer Gary Mazaham from the NPA informing Zuma that it would not be prosecuting him criminally.
“I decline to prosecute. There are no prospects of a successful prosecution,” it read.
David Maree, the advocate who represented Dube’s family, said last week he was surprised at the NPA’s decision not to prosecute.
“My understanding was from a law point of view, when someone is responsible for a death or an accident, then the next procedure would be a criminal matter that would follow against the person.
“But like I said, it was to my surprise the NPA made a decision and said they would not prosecute the matter,” Maree said.
An NPA source close to the case last week echoed Maree, saying they were surprised by the decision not to prosecute because it was “clear that Zuma should have been prosecuted for his negligence”.
“Based on this judgment, the families of the affected parties can sue Zuma for millions as this is a winnable case in a criminal court,” the source said.
NPA spokesman Luvuyo Mfaku said the decision not to prosecute Zuma had come after an assessment of the evidence of witnesses as well as those of the experts who gave evidence at the inquest, which indicated the state would not have been able to prove a case beyond reasonable doubt.
“The finding of the magistrate is based on a balance of probabilities.
“The standard of proof in a criminal trial, beyond reasonable doubt, cannot be met on the available evidence.
“That can also be inferred from the reasoning of the magistrate who refers to the evidence of Mr Zuma as the basis for the finding,” he said.
Mfaku also confirmed that the original accident sketch and statement given by Zuma to Sandton police, which disappeared before the inquest, had not been traced.
Mazaham said that neither he nor Zuma would respond to questions as they related to the leaked emails.