UK ‘paedo’ loses extradition hearing

THE British helicopter pilot and IT consultant wanted in the UK for a raft of paedophile charges ran out of legal options this week when he lost his Cape High Court extradition appeal.

The only thing now preventing the transfer of Welshman Lee Tucker from Pollsmoor Prison to a British jail is the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services not approving his extradition order handed down by a Cape Town magistrate in November 2017.

Before the order can be presented to the minister, however, the High Court has ordered that Tucker be allowed to place evidence before the magistrate’s court of how UK law discriminates against gay men in relation to the charges he faces.

He can also present evidence of the alleged “vile, distorted and exaggerated” media coverage he has received.

“Such evidence might have a bearing on the minister’s decision,” the High Court judgement noted.

“The appellant was entitled to demand that the magistrate receive it, and in this regard… the proceedings were irregular.”

Tucker “was badly treated both by the prosecutor, as well as by the magistrate, who was driven by impatience and intemperate haste, to conclude the proceedings as quickly as he was able to without having due regard for the appellant’s procedural rights”.

Tucker has 15 days to present his evidence and the director of public prosecutions has 15 days to respond to it.

The magistrate must consider this further evidence and “shall thereafter submit the record of the proceedings together with such further evidence, and any report as he may deem necessary in respect thereof, as well as a copy of this judgment, to the Minister, as soon as possible, for his decision”.

Tucker, 55, has been fighting his extradition with a succession of lawyers since his March 2016 arrest.

He believes he has been falsely accused and will not get a fair trial in the UK where he faces 42 charges of sexual assault of boys under the age of 16. Most of the charges are related to non-consensual anal or oral sex with under-age boys which constitutes rape under current South African law.

Tucker was dubbed one of the UK’S most wanted fugitives after he fled the country in early 2000 while awaiting sentencing in a Bristol court on paedophile charges.

A few years later he popped up in Cape Town, quietly bought a house in Green Point not far from Reddam House School and retrained as a helicopter pilot despite three pending UK arrest warrants.

Tucker said he found his wanted status “a joke” as he had successfully renewed his British passport twice while living in Cape Town.

Michael Hellens, told the court that Zuma’s car had a high propensity to aquaplane on wet surfaces and that his client could not at the time of the crash foreseen that there would have been a puddle of water in the middle of a freeway.

In making his case for a discharge and acquittal of Zuma’s charges in terms of section 174 of the Criminal Procedure Act, Hellens argued that the State had failed to prove that Zuma had acted in a negligent manner.

But, yesterday, Thupaatlase disagreed and instead told the court during his judgment in the matter of the discharge application that the evidence presented by the State during the trial was not of a weak nature.

“Given the conclusion that I have reached, it suffices to say the evidence was not of such poor quality that a reasonable person could not accept it,” said Thupaatlase.

Although this was not the judgment Zuma and his legal defence were hoping for, it did not appear to dampen the younger Zuma’s spirit.

He walked out of the court with a smile on his face, even occasionally pausing to greet and take pictures with those who stopped him.

He was met in the court’s parking lot by a group of Black First Land First (BLF) supporters, who campaigned for his release.

Deputy president Zanele Lwana said Zuma had never denied that his vehicle was involved in a collision with the taxi on that rainy February night over five years ago.

“The fact that there has been a life lost, I don’t think we should use that to blackmail our people to be mobilised against this man because he is the son of the former president of the country,” she said.

Lwana also lambasted Afriforum, which she believes “only goes after black people” and for taking advantage of a situation that involves two families.

She also accused the body of “mobilising society” to be against Zuma.

But Afriforum welcomed the court’s decision and said Zuma had a prima facie case to answer.

“This victory is not just a victory for Afriforum and the State, it is also a victory for the Dube family and for everyone in the country who believe in equality before the law,” Wico Swanepoel, of its private prosecution unit, said outside the court house.

The rejection of Zuma’s discharge application was also welcomed by the National Prosecuting Authority.

“We are happy with the court’s decision,” said spokesperson Phindi Mjonondwane. “We are glad that the court ruled that the evidence of the State witnesses was not of a poor nature and therefore it cannot be ignored.”

Zuma’s trial will recommence on May 15 and is set down for three days, when he may take the witness stand to testify to his version of the car crash.