Mbenenge’s legal counsel attempts to poke holes in Expert’s testimony
Advocate Griffiths Madonsela probed forensic and legal linguist, Dr Zakeera Docrat on her authority to speak on the subject matter as opposed to the authors of the messages.
Eastern Cape Judge President Selby Mbenenge (centre) at the Judicial Conduct Tribunal in Sandton, Johannesburg on 5 May 2025. The tribunal is investigating sexual harassment allegations against him. Picture: Katlego Jiyane/EWN
JOHANNESBURG - Legal counsel for Eastern Cape judge president, Selby Mbenenge has attempted to discredit the witness brought by evidence leader, advocate Salome Scheepers, before a tribunal into the judge's conduct.
Advocate Griffiths Madonsela probed forensic and legal linguist, Dr Zakeera Docrat, on her authority to speak on the subject matter as opposed to the authors of the messages.
On Tuesday, the tribunal concluded its second day of hearings into the tribunal's investigation into the conduct of the senior judge.
Mengo has accused the judge of making unwanted sexual advances between 2021 and 2022.
ALSO READ:
- Mbenenge's heart emojis were indicative of romantic feelings towards Mengo, tribunal told
- Forensic linguist testifies Mbenenge sent emojis with explicit innuendos to Mengo
Advocate Madonsela attempted to poke holes in the testimony of expert witness, forensic and legal linguist Docrat, questioning why her understanding of emojis would trump the shared meaning ascribed by two parties in conversation.
This follows Docrat's previous testimony in which she said Eastern Cape Judge President, Mbenenge used an eggplant and a peach to depict intimacy when he sent them to the high court secretary, Mengo.
Docrat stressed that while the emojis have a standardised meaning attached to them, context in the chain of texts was important.
"You wouldn't be sending fruit and vegetables in this text chain because the conversation is not around fruit and vegetables at that time," said Docrat.
Despite this, Madonsela said that Mengo's interpretation of the emojis should prevail over that of the expert witness.
"Am I to understand you then to be suggesting that if Mengo believed that she was sending an emoji x to mean y and you come to the conclusion that it meant z, you should be taken as speaking to the meaning of what Mengo meant to convey," said Madonsela.
Tribunal chairperson, retired judge president Bernard Ngoepe, expressed concern over the understanding of the expert would override that of the recipient,t which he said could possibly create a different conversation.