The possibility of Jacob Zuma having contracted HIV from the woman he allegedly raped was discussed in the Johannesburg High Court on Thursday.
The former deputy president has said he had unprotected and consensual sex with the woman on November 2 last year.
Virology specialist Professor Desmond Martin told the court the risk of acquiring the virus through unprotected sex is three in 10Â 000.
When examining the woman who alleges that Zuma raped her on November 2 last year, Dr Mupata Likibi previously testified that she had a 5mm tear on her “fourchette posterior” — in her vaginal region.
The complainant, who has told the court she is HIV-positive, says Zuma raped her.
Martin said the risk of contracting HIV could increase to one in 1Â 000 if the HIV-affected person has a high viral load and a low CD4 count — a measure of the clinical symptoms of HIV/Aids.
Bleeding, abrasions, genital ulcerations, not being circumcised or inflammation through sexually transmitted diseases can increase the risk of acquiring the infection to one in 100.
Martin began his testimony by explaining that the disease is caused by two viruses — HIV1 and HIV2. HIV1 is subdivided into three groups and there are several subdivisions within these.
Martin said a number of these sub-types recombine with each other to form “circulating recombinant forms” (CRF). Fifteen CRFs of HIV exist due to the genetic diversity of HIV1. Exposure to specific sub-types can lead to “super re-infection”. That virus can become dominant and an individual cannot mount an adequate response to the new virus.
A normal CD4 count ranges between 500 and 1Â 200 and anti-retroviral treatment is usually recommended if it goes below 200.
Martin said that the lower the CD4 count in a body, the higher the viral load.
Adjournment
Zuma’s trial has been adjourned for a week and will continue next Thursday, Judge Willem van der Merwe said.
The adjournment came after one of the investigating officers, Superintendent Peter Linda, finished his cross-examination.
Prosecutor Charin de Beer said she had not officially closed the state’s case.
The state will use the time to analyse their case and decide whether or not they need to bring in new evidence and testimony.
If she decides on Thursday to close the case the defence will then start with their side of proceedings — or they could invoke Section 174 of the Criminal Procedure Act which asks for a discharge.
This means that the accused believes that the state’s case is so weak that it is not necessary for the defence to answer the allegations. – AFP