Sixty-eight court days since the fraud and corruption trial of Durban businessman Schabir Shaik started, the waiting has begun - and there's no indication which way the verdict will go.

As almost four years of investigation, preparation and prosecution brought the evidentiary part of the trial to a close, the last words from lead prosecutor Billy Downer in the Durban High Court yesterday were:

"I am indebted to the court for the indulgence."

Both Downer and Shaik's counsel, Francois van Zyl SC, were thanked by Judge Hilary Squires for the "meticulously careful way" in which they had presented their cases, as well as their "sensible corroboration".

Shaik, uncharacteristically, had nothing to say. He indicated that he would comment after Judge Squires makes his ruling.

In contrast with the first day of the trial in October, the number of spectators in the public gallery and journalists in the press box had dwindled to a handful of stalwarts.

As Van Zyl asked the court to acquit his client on two charges of corruption and one of fraud, he asked what has been on everybody's lips since the start of the trial: "My learned friend (Downer) asked why (Deputy President Jacob) Zuma has not given evidence. We ask: Why has he not been charged?"

He had argued that even if the court found that Shaik had lied about an allegation that he had solicited a bribe from French arms company Thomson on behalf of Zuma, it did not mean that he was guilty of corruption.

In his argument, Van Zyl emphasised that the state had not proved that there was a conclusive meeting of minds about a bribe agreement between Shaik, Zuma and French arms dealer Alain Thetard.

He said an alternative theory - that Shaik had used Zuma's name to get money from Thomson - was as plausible as the scenario put forward by the state.

In response, Downer argued that it was not open to them to speculate *1 about a so-called "innocent explanation" at this stage of the trial *1. He labelled Van Zyl's argument "untested, redundant and self-serving".

A tense Shaik turned to fizzy vitamin tablets for energy. At times he would scribble furiously on a notepad and at times sit back with his eyes closed, as if in pain.

For the first time since the start of the trial, the courtroom was almost devoid of files. All that was left on the usually cluttered table where Shaik was seated was a bottle of mineral water, a tube of vitamin pills, a pencil, a pen and two highlighters, and a cellphone.

A few years ago, another judge, after calling for three rounds of closing argument and exhausting all questions, asked counsel: "So what do you want me to do now? Make a decision?"

Judge Squires seemed quite happy to do just that. Judgment is expected on or after May 30.

With ackowledgement to Estelle Ellis and The Star.

*1 This apparently is a Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) precedent.

Too late - she cried.