I suggest that the Sunday Times place a full page front page cartoon of lady justice after rape has been completed. i.e. huddled and crying with clothes torn.

Please dont for one minute think that I support rape in any form. But Zapiro has put his pen exactly on the point.

These “goons” think that they can subvert, defy and rape the rule of law in this land. What does our constitution stand for if this happens.

Zimbabwe here we come!!!

Shame on you Zuma.

lindelani maseko – You are an uneducated biast fool, just like ZUMA.

Zaphiro for president!!!!

I would be honoured to make it onto “Whose line is it anyway?” (:

I fear that you will not appreciate it even if I explained myself more thoroughly, but will do so out of courtesy.

If you read whom my post was aimed at, Siya, then you’d have gone back to what Siya wrote which contained some interesting analytical points and being an analytical person myself, I immediately saw other directions in logic which could be explored. As such I have no particular attachment to anything I wrote, being merely a possible scenario, how likely or not it may be and I feel no unction to place any value judgment or probability factor to it.

In the specifics of your complaints:

Is it possible that in reality the courts dish out true justice 99% of the time but that in some cases that 1% get off because of paying off the right people or having the right connections? Is justice generally intact or does it not exist because of 1% (extreme) cases not getting justice meted out? (Try to separate what I’m saying from this specific situation, viewing it generally)

Regarding the average person’s view mattering to some extent:
It was said in the context of interpretation of the cartoon in a context such as a history course where you have may have the following broad categories of views: cartoonist, academics, public.

As such each of those categories of people have views regarding interpretation and though the public perception of it might be completely false in reference to the cartoonist’s intentions, it still matters to some extent in making a value judgment about the cartoon and whether it successfully conveyed its message.

Oi, now that is long winded. It was just a way of looking at the cartoon in reference to Siya’s comments, that’s all, nothing earth shattering.

Sane views and what I expressed above is at the end a mere academic exercise, but as you say the core focus is on “shocking” us into seriously looking at what is happening and asking questions about it.

An interesting interpretation. I notice that PM is not amused by it. But I think your interpretation has a potential. Seeing the cartoon as depicting some future scenario born of the current political attempts to interfere with the work of the judiciary is reassuring, I must say. That interpretation says we are not there yet but could be/will be. The problem is that there seems to be some unanimity among current affairs following South Africans – including most participants on this blog, and myself- that Zapiro is depicting the present and not the future. That is why I felt that by depicting lady justice helplessly on the ground Zapiro is already in that possible future (according to your interpretation) and not in the present. I guess we are misreading the cartoon.

That was just by way of responding. Now technicalities on the side, in the end what is important is that Zapiro is trying to alert us in a powerful way to the enormity of the threat on our judiciary, and even more alarming, to the source of that threat. You, me and PM and the rest of the bloggers, should hope that the threat never becomes a reality.