South Africa: While Farmer convicted of feeding Black employee to albino lions...

aria

Former Moderator
Joined
Dec 4, 1977
Posts
39,546
This story is gruesome and truly bizarre. In an creepy echo of apartheid feeling, the white farmer (who raised rare albino lions) fed a black worker (who had apparently reported bad working conditions) to his albino lions. The worker was hacked by machetes but still alive when he was fed to the beasts.

This has been covered by all the major papers, but I had to search around to get the most vivid account -here by a South African paper:

-------------------
White farmer fed black worker to lions
'Scott-Crossley had a grudge against Chisale'

By Carol Hills

Nelson Chisale's killers were convicted of his murder on Thursday. They had viciously beaten him with pangas and then fed him, alive, to lions at Mokwalo White Lion Project, near Hoedspruit.

Mark Scott-Crossley, 37, and Simon Mathebula, 41, were each found guilty on a charge of murder. Both had pleaded not guilty.

Judge George Maluleke, who heard the case with assessors Kate Choshi and Elphus Seemela, also decided that the testimony of a fourth accused who turned state witness, Robert Mnisi, was sufficiently truthful to indemnify him from prosecution.

He has pleaded not guilty, but has not yet testified
A final accused, Richard Mathebula, 41, will stand trial separately, after he recovers from suspected TB, for which he has been admitted to hospital. He has pleaded not guilty, but has not yet testified.

All that was found of Chisale in the encampment was a shaft of long bones, a skull with no mandible, fragments of rib, vertebrae, pelvic girdle and a finger, as well as his shredded shirt and ripped pair of trousers.

His remains were buried at his birthplace at Maboloka village, near Brits, in March 2004.

Scott-Crossley masterminded the murder of Chisale and then helped feed him to a pride of five lions held captive in an encampment in Hoedspruit, Maluleke said.

His verdict took almost six hours to deliver. Six hours was also the length of time that Chisale was held captive on the day of his death - tied up and under the guard of Simon Mathebula, who Maluleke said had acted in concert with Scott-Crossley in killing him.

lion_wideweb__430x299.jpg

CAPTION: Mark Scott-Crossley

"The evidence of guilt against Scott-Crossley is overwhelming," Maluleke ruled.

Finding him "untruthful", Maluleke ruled that he had held a grudge against Chisale after the former farmworker complained about him to the department of labour.

Chisale also brought a malicious damage case against Scott-Crossley with the police for burning his property after he had been dismissed.

Scott-Crossley even went as far as banning Chisale from his game farm. This "bad blood" between them spilled over on the fateful day of Chisale's murder when he arrived at the farm only to be detained by Simon Mathebula and a co-accused, Richard "Doctor" Mathebula.

Maluleke held that Scott-Crossley's workers "displayed such deference and timidity" to him, treating him with such reverence even after their arrest, that he "could not see how any one of them could ever even try to threaten" him - the reason Scott-Crossley proffered for his involvement in the disposal of Chisale's corpse.

At least two of them testified it was, instead, Scott-Crossley who had threatened them with violence or death to compel them to comply with his instructions to load the injured Chisale on to his bakkie, to throw him to the lions and then not to speak to anybody about what they had done.

The investigating officer, Senior Superintendent David Hlatshwayo, told the court Scott-Crossley had come across to him as a "cheeky person". Over and above this was "the incident relating to when he showed improper conduct by angrily and aggressively shouting to the court".

Maluleke found Scott-Crossley's behaviour "highly relevant" with regard to whether there was possibility he could have made the threats, ruling that at various stages the workers were "intimidated and threatened and fearful of Scott-Crossley".

Maluleke, however, noted that his workers had ample opportunity to stop what was happening to Chisale.

"They had the opportunity of at least six hours (when Scott-Crossley was not on the farm) to do something. They all failed to even try to report the incident to the police at any time."

"They did not assist Chisale. They did not seek help," he found.

The state had proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Mathebula had been instructed to arrest Chisale and keep him on the game farm.

Simon Mathebula had been "like a whistleblower" in staying at the farmhouse to watch over Scott-Crossley's son while the others fed Chisale to the lions and had even washed Chisale's blood off the bakkie the next day.

Maluleke found him guilty of the murder on the basis of having acted in common purpose with Scott-Crossley.

Maluleke has postponed the matter until August 10 for sentencing.

- This article was originally published on page 1 of The Pretoria News on April 29, 2005

newspic4271cf4448e2f

CAPTION: Guilty: Mark Scott-Crossley shaves as he waits inside the Pharaborwa holding cells. Photo: Bathini Mbatha
 

Neo Rasa

Whip's Subordinate
Joined
Mar 26, 2001
Posts
1,771
I think it says a lot about how screwed up many people are when I actually think to myself "Eh, at least he didn't pull an Idi Amin and broadcast it on national television."
 

Shawn Carr2o

6200|!!|Drillslug Driver
Joined
Oct 13, 2004
Posts
6,244
That is very sick & very evil thing to do to
someone & feeding him to the lions while he
was being eaten alive. :eek: :(

They need to feed that murderer to the lions
while being eaten alive. :mad_2:

I hope that bastard gets what's coming to
him. :mad_2:


How can someone do such a thing like that. :oh_no:
 

Mr.Nemoperson

Bunker Buster
15 Year Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2004
Posts
1,462
Maby he got the idea from Marv in Sin City ;) \

But yeah thats some fucked up shit :loco:
 

norton9478

So Many Posts
No Time
For Games.
20 Year Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2003
Posts
34,074
I'm just a cynic.

And yes, this all stems from a culture that during the 80s, ronald reagan decided wasn't that bad.
 
Last edited:

C.A.R25

Genjuro's Frog
Joined
Aug 8, 2004
Posts
1,136
Not worthy of life...

newspic4271cf4448e2f

This man almost looks like he wants to smile at the camera... I can't see any remorse in his face... I hope they have the death sentence in South Africa, because this guy is not worth of life IMO.
 

Hidden Character

Leader of The Hyperstone Heist,
20 Year Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2002
Posts
9,543
I say gag him and feed his sorry-ass to a cannibal tribe down there.
 

galfordo

Analinguist of the Year
15 Year Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2003
Posts
18,418
norton9478 said:
I'm just a cynic.

And yes, this all stems from a culture that during the 80s, ronald reagan decided wasn't that bad.

:kekeke: :kekeke: :kekeke:

I still stand by my original left wingnut statement. How in the hell does a crazy murderer stem from Ronald Reagan? Did Ronnie raise this guy on his farm to use black people for food, or what?

You've somehow managed to be even more "out there" with this post.
 

norton9478

So Many Posts
No Time
For Games.
20 Year Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2003
Posts
34,074
Not really a connection.



It's just that Regan Sided with the Farmers and thier old government.......
 

aria

Former Moderator
Joined
Dec 4, 1977
Posts
39,546
I don't really know why this had to go a little off tangent, but I agree that Reagan did support the Aparteid gov't of South Africa. His support of the regime only gave it's insane practises more legitimacy and extended its shelf-life -extending the misery of all those involved (I placed a small clip that explains the history below).

Remember, those were the seriously problematic days of "anyone who opposes the USSR is our friend!!! :kekeke:
-- Dark murderous regimes in Central America? Friends! :kekeke:
-- Saddam Hussein? Friend! :kekeke:
-- Osama Bin Ladin? Friend! :kekeke:
-- Racial Aparteid state in South Africa/Namibia? FRIENDS 4 EVER :kekeke:


How soon we forget history. The hypocrisy then and since still runs deep.

here's something I snagged that explains the history: [source]

Economic Sanctions said:
U.S. policy toward South Africa since 1962 has been shaped largely by strategic and economic concerns, including the preservation of access to South Africa's immense mineral resources and the protection of markets and investments. For three decades, U.S. administrations have consistently resisted calls from within and outside South Africa for economic sanctions and have argued for the importance of trade and investments as a means of encouraging change in South Africa's policy of apartheid. In the mid 1970s, mounting international pressure for U.S. to consider economic sanctions against South Africa was rejected. The Carter administration vetoed U.N. resolutions urging reduction of economic ties with South Africa. Responding to critics of U.S. policy in South Africa, President Carter emphasized the positive side of economic relations and enlightened free enterprise as a positive force for change in South Africa.

Throughout his tenure, President Reagan studiously avoided criticizing the South African government, repeatedly praising the Botha Administration for making substantial reforms despite the overwhelming evidence of the continued and extensive exploitation and oppression of the black majority in South Africa. He has directly and openly embraced the Botha Administration as "an ally and friend," demonstrating what critics saw as a callous indifference to world-wide demands for human rights and basic freedoms for the blacks.

In the mid-1980s, public concern about the Reagan Administration's policy toward South Africa was rapidly translated into political action by a broad-based anti-apartheid movement across the United States.The movement was marked by protest demonstrations in major cities and on college campuses and by a call for tougher U.S. policies toward Pretoria. This campaign included boycotts of banks that made loans to South Africa, the sale of stock in U.S. firms operating in South Africa and the withdrawal of U.S. firms with subsidiaries there. In response to both these pressures and to a declaration by the Botha Administration of a country-wide state of emergency in July 1985, Congress, led by the Congresional Black Caucus, introduced legislation calling for economic sanctions. The House passed a sanctions bill in May 1985, followed soon after by the Senate. The sanctions bills provided for broad restrictions on trade with South Africa and the complete disinvestment of U.S. companies. However, both bills were pre-empted by the introduction of a series of limited economic sanctions in a Presidential Executive Order issued on September 9, 1985. In a statement accompanying the order, President Reagan explained that he opposed economic sanctions and was issuing the order only to forestall Congress from adopting even harsher measures.

The Reagan Administration began a concerted effort to ensure that any sanctions that were implemented would be coupled with new and more aggressive efforts to maintain close relations with the South African government. Fundamental to these efforts was the coordination of a public diplomacy campaign, initiated by National Security Decision Directive 187 (NSDD 187), which outlined the Administration's new course of action to maintain a positive image for its policy of "constructive engagement" and for the South African government itself. Approved by the National Security Council in 1985, the public diplomacy strategy calls for the undertaking of a program to gain better public understanding and support of U.S. policy toward South Africa (NSDD 187 and related documents are contained in this collection.

Exactly one year later, Congress passed the Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act of 1986 over President Reagan's veto. The Act prohibited U.S. trade and other economic relations with South Africa. It anticipated the need for sanctions by other countries and specifically directed the president to seek the cooperation of industrialized democracies as well as South Africa's other trading partners. But because of its opposition to sanctions, the Reagan Administration did little to gain cooperation from other countries and refused to support mandatory international sanctions against South Africa in the United Nations.
 
Last edited:

norton9478

So Many Posts
No Time
For Games.
20 Year Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2003
Posts
34,074
Bobak said:
I don't really know why this had to go a little off tangent, but I agree that Reagan did support the Aparteid gov't of South Africa.

Remember, those were the seriously problematic days of "anyone who opposes the USSR is our friend!!! :kekeke:
Dark murderous regime in Central America? Friend! :kekeke:
Saddam Hussein? Friend! :kekeke:
Osama Bin Ladin? Friend! :kekeke:
Racial Aparteid state in South Africa/Namibia? FRIENDS 4 EVER :kekeke:

How soon we forget history. The hypocrisy then and since still runs deep.

You forgot Negraponte's Central American Death Squads.
And Good Ol' Manuel Noriega who is sitting in an American Prison.
 

neobuyer

Master of Disguise,
Joined
Oct 7, 2000
Posts
8,083
It's funny and sort of ironic that they fed him to 'white' lions :kekeke:
 

aria

Former Moderator
Joined
Dec 4, 1977
Posts
39,546
neobuyer said:
It's funny and sort of ironic that they fed him to 'white' lions :kekeke:

I couldn't get poor Sigfried & Roy out of my head.
 

Loopz

Formerly Punjab,
Joined
Aug 16, 2001
Posts
12,871
Bobak said:
I don't really know why this had to go a little off tangent, but I agree that Reagan did support the Aparteid gov't of South Africa. His support of the regime only gave it's insane practises more legitimacy and extended its shelf-life -extending the misery of all those involved (I placed a small clip that explains the history below).

Remember, those were the seriously problematic days of "anyone who opposes the USSR is our friend!!! :kekeke:
-- Dark murderous regimes in Central America? Friends! :kekeke:
-- Saddam Hussein? Friend! :kekeke:
-- Osama Bin Ladin? Friend! :kekeke:
-- Racial Aparteid state in South Africa/Namibia? FRIENDS 4 EVER :kekeke:


How soon we forget history. The hypocrisy then and since still runs deep.

here's something I snagged that explains the history: [source]

The hypocrisy is still alive and well today, only it's under the banner or "Anyone who opposes Osama bin Laden is our friend!" and includes the likes of Saudi Arabia, which is an egregious human rights violator that still conducts public executions, oppression of women, and enforces hardcore Islamic law.

Then again, we're headed that way anyway, only under the banner of Christianity.
The only real difference will be instead of turbans, gowns and beards, we'll sport lots of shiny happy white folks wearing nice button down shirts and clean shaven.
Same ethics though, get it straight in your fucking heads. Muhammad or Jesus, same bag of ancient stupidity.
 

bokmeow

Ned's Ninja Academy Dropout
Joined
Apr 11, 2002
Posts
11,314
Bobak said:
I don't really know why this had to go a little off tangent, but I agree that Reagan did support the Aparteid gov't of South Africa. His support of the regime only gave it's insane practises more legitimacy and extended its shelf-life -extending the misery of all those involved (I placed a small clip that explains the history below).

Remember, those were the seriously problematic days of "anyone who opposes the USSR is our friend!!! :kekeke:
-- Dark murderous regimes in Central America? Friends! :kekeke:
-- Saddam Hussein? Friend! :kekeke:
-- Osama Bin Ladin? Friend! :kekeke:
-- Racial Aparteid state in South Africa/Namibia? FRIENDS 4 EVER :kekeke:


How soon we forget history. The hypocrisy then and since still runs deep.

here's something I snagged that explains the history: [source]



Bobak 4, galfordo 0

1, 2, 3, 4! 4! beautiful! points! Aa ha ha ha ha!
*Voice of Sesame Street's Count*
*thunder in the distance*
 

bloodriot

Galford's Armourer
Joined
Jun 28, 2004
Posts
463
C.A.R25 said:
newspic4271cf4448e2f

This man almost looks like he wants to smile at the camera... I can't see any remorse in his face... I hope they have the death sentence in South Africa, because this guy is not worth of life IMO.

nope but he will be getting a lot of dark meat in prison for the rest of his life... it's like 40 ppl in a 12 man cell and the prisons are rife with AIDS, violent gangsters and a evil, evil gang culture
 

galfordo

Analinguist of the Year
15 Year Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2003
Posts
18,418
norton9478 said:
Not really a connection.



It's just that Regan Sided with the Farmers and thier old government.......

Bobak said:
I don't really know why this had to go a little off tangent, but I agree that Reagan did support the Aparteid gov't of South Africa. His support of the regime only gave it's insane practises more legitimacy and extended its shelf-life -extending the misery of all those involved (I placed a small clip that explains the history below).

Remember, those were the seriously problematic days of "anyone who opposes the USSR is our friend!!! :kekeke:
-- Dark murderous regimes in Central America? Friends! :kekeke:
-- Saddam Hussein? Friend! :kekeke:
-- Osama Bin Ladin? Friend! :kekeke:
-- Racial Aparteid state in South Africa/Namibia? FRIENDS 4 EVER :kekeke:


How soon we forget history. The hypocrisy then and since still runs deep.

here's something I snagged that explains the history: [source]

That's all fine and dandy, but the practice of feeding people to lions was not something Reagan embraced, and your implicit connections between the points listed above and using humans as lion food require quite a bit of imagination.

Essentially, this is one isolated maniac in Africa committing a horrible act, and somehow people manage to bring the Reagan era into this?

You can't look at this guy and tell me that he represents a normal, functional African citizen. He's a nutjob, plain and simple, and that's not Reagan's fault, no matter how many sweeping generalizations you come up with.
 

soulthug

Wannabe Thug,, born 1991
15 Year Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2004
Posts
8,711
Thats fucking outrageous and fucked up :mad_2: :very_ang:
 

C.A.R25

Genjuro's Frog
Joined
Aug 8, 2004
Posts
1,136
bloodriot said:
nope but he will be getting a lot of dark meat in prison for the rest of his life... it's like 40 ppl in a 12 man cell and the prisons are rife with AIDS, violent gangsters and a evil, evil gang culture

Damn, it sounds worst than the death sentence. :kekeke:
 
Top