Letters Correspondent

I find it inconceivable that a judge of Chris Nicholson’s experience could have arrived at the conclusions he did, based on the testimony he heard. I was under the impression that judges had to find on the facts presented and not on a personal view or perception.

I understand that while a judge is entitled to make an opinion in a judgment, the opinion must certainly be based on the facts of the matter before him. If one assumes this to be correct, then what could have caused the experienced Nicholson to voice such a sweeping opinion that it resulted in a state president being removed from office?

At the risk of joining the chorus of conspiracy theorists, something seems awfully odd about this saga. Did the ANC support the judiciary too much this time? *1

Barry Ross
Benoni

With acknowledgements to Barry Ross and Business Day.