No similarities between Jub Jub & Pistorius cases - Zak Yacoob

The retired judge says he can't see how the cases can be equated and this made no sense to him.

Former Constitutional Court Judge Zak Yacoob. Picture: Facebook.

JOHANNESBURG -Former Constituitonal Court judge Zak Yacoob believes the cases of Oscar Pistorius and Molemo 'Jub Jub' Maarohanye are very different and can't be equated.

"There was a great deal of drunkenness in the one case. There's a difference between the use of a gun and shooting through a bathroom door in which you know one human being is present and your car being used as a weapon to achieve a particular result."

He adds that he could not see how the cases could be equated and the very idea made no sense to him.

Yacoob says that the jury is still out on Oscar Pistorius, and that it is not yet known what a higher court will find if and when the state appeals.

Yacoob highlights the humanity of judges and acknowledges their own subjectivity and fallibility.

"Judging is a difficult business ultimately. Because all judges are human beings, they have a slightly different view of the evidence depending on where they came from and who they are. But secondly all cases are different too. So ultimately I wouldn't say too much about the process until it has passed all the courts but differences of opinion are bound to occur."

He says that court, in a sense, is a story telling contest with the difference being that courts don't decide the truth. They decide what has been established on a balance of probabilities in the evidence in a particular case. So all judges can do, is evaluate the evidence and decide where the probabilities lie, in that particular case and give judgment in that way. Yacoob says nobody actually knows the truth.

Listen to Yacoob's full interview Talk Radio 702' John Robbie _ here._