Should this informant be believed?
January 15, 2004
A criminal, with his own personal motivations, alleges that the Minister of Home Affairs has been involved in the killings of several persons over a period of time.
This same criminal claims that he was involved in the killing gang, but had a falling-out.
The Minister of Home Affairs in an impromptu statement stated categorically that when a criminal's 'back is against the wall', he will do anything to save himself - a little lie is insignificant to that criminal.
The lengths that he would go to save himself are unlimited. If he has to say that a high priest also played a role in killings, he will do so.
So without evidence, whom would responsible persons believe? How feasible is it to believe a criminal as against a Minister of Government?
Tomorrow, we might find that another criminal who wants asylum because of a disagreement with his colleagues, decides to say that some high Government official or even a member of the opposition is involved with Saddam Hussein. Is our society so gullible that we tend to believe all that we hear?