Meyiwa case: tried by public opinion?

QUESTIONS are being asked on whether the Senzo Meyiwa murder case will ever end with an outcome that is just and equitable, considering the unprecedented court of public opinion’s interference.

The case was this week postponed to May next year, rendering the tired adage “the wheels of justice grind and grind slowly” nauseatingly true.

From newspapers and TV coverage of the trial, one has but to ask if the sub judice rule still applies in any form.

The case seems to be tried in two parallel fora: the criminal trial before Judge Tshifhiwa Maumela and the court of public opinion on social media.

Whatever Judge Robert Nugent said in his Western Cape 2007 judgment on relaxing the sub judice rule in favour of freedom of expression and the right to information, he never anticipated the abuse and excesses of his progressive judgment.

The public spectacle in the manner in which the case is covered by the mainstream media and social media leaves a bitter taste in the mouth. The whole sordid coverage of this case makes a mockery of the wheels of justice in motion and the pain and grief of specifically Meyiwa’s mother.

The public has the tendency of not differentiating between fact and opinion. Most gullible people hang on to every word of these armchair commentators.

Are these commentators not deliberately or inadvertently pitting the court of law against the court of public opinion? Where does one draw the line of what is fact, and what is fiction?

One can’t help but form the impression that everybody associated with this case inside and outside the courtroom, one way or the other, is seeking to be a famous celebrity.

Controversy sells. It is the new currency and mileage.

The salient question, though, is: Is the coverage of the Meyiwa case not prejudicial and harmful to the unfolding trial itself?

Instead of showcasing the machinations of our legal system, is the coverage not bringing the legal system into disrepute, discrediting it and second-guessing the unfolding trial itself?

In the era of “narratives” and “alternative facts”, it is not surprising that most people don't know what and whom to believe anymore in the Meyiwa case. Talk about a legal mess.