Courts

Joshlin Smith: Key witness cross-examined, judge intervenes several times during questioning

"This is not a sophisticated witness. Break your questions into chunks," judge Nathan Erasmus said during Lourentia Lombaard's examination.

Published by
By Carien Grobler

Cross-examination of a key witness in the high-profile case into Joshlin Smith’s disappearance threatened to get heated on Tuesday.

The then-six-year-old disappeared from her family’s home in Middelpos on 19 January 2024. It was alleged last week that the young girl had been sold to a sangoma for R20 000.

Lourentia (Rens) Lombaard, a friend of Joshlin’s mother Kelly, finished her evidence-in-chief for the state on Monday morning. She alleged that Smith told her whoever took Joshlin was looking for her eyes and skin.

Advertisement

Her fourth day of testimony started on Tuesday at the Western Cape Circuit High Court in Saldanha, with the defence cross-examinating her.

Lourentia Lombaard under cross-examination by the defence at the Western Cape Circuit High Court in Saldanha. Picture: Screengrab

Police visit Lombaard after Joshlin’s disappearance

When Fanie Harmse, the defence lawyer for Jacquen “Boeta” Appollis, asked Lombaard if her boyfriend, Ayanda Letoni, still resided in Saldanha, Lombaard replied that he left in March 2024.

She testified that he left before she was arrested on 25 March 2024 and remained in custody until 21 October 2024. She subsequently moved to another house with her children.

Advertisement

Lombaard said the police went to Letoni’s house shortly after Joshlin disappeared.

“He was angry and upset because Kelly brought the police to his house.”

Harmse also asked if Joshlin and Letoni had ever interacted. She said they knew each other because Letoni visited Apollis and Smith’s house.

Advertisement

Harmse referred to Lombaard’s testimony that Letoni sold drugs from his house, to which she said: “I cannot confirm exactly when he stopped, but I told him to stop”.

Lombaard questioned about drug use

He put it to Lombaard that she testified that she became a drug user when she moved to Saldanha, and if so, why did she request Letoni to stop selling? She alleged that Letoni was a drinker and would use all the money to buy alcohol.

Harmse challenged this, claiming Letoni could buy alcohol from the car wash he ran if he didn’t get money from selling drugs.

Advertisement

“The car wash wasn’t busy every day. He then would sell scrap metal for money,” Lombaard replied.

“Your testimony also leads that accused number one [Appollis] sometimes helped Ayanda at the car wash,” Harmse stated. Lombaard replied that he helped out one or two days per week.

He referred to Lombaard’s confessed use of the drugs Mandrax and Tik and asked how regularly she would use these.

Advertisement

She said she would smoke two or three times a day, provided that Letoni gave her money. However, according to Lombaard, she, Appolis and Smith would never smoke at Ayanda’s house because “he was very strict. If I had my own Tik, I would smoke at home”.

Harmse questioned if Lombaard had previously testified that they smoked at Letoni’s house.

However, Judge Nathan Erasmus intervened and said Lombaard’s answer under cross-examination corresponded with his notes.

Judge intervenes as defence questions witness

Harmse further questioned Lombaard about her testimony of the events of Sunday, 18 February 2024.

She recalled walking along the rocks to Smith and Appollis’ home and seeing a “detective bakkie” on the other side of the canal. She assumed it was the police enquiring about an alleged chicken theft nearby.

Harmse said his client would testify that this happened on Saturday, 17 February.

Lombaard alleged that on that Saturday night, Letoni gave her money for Tik, after which she visited Smith. She allegedly asked where Appollis was, to which Smith answered that he was not back yet and said he was going to Stefanus’s farm [from where the chickens were stolen].

Erasmus, seemingly agitated, asked whether he should constantly remind counsel to be precise in their questioning after Harmse stated that Lombaard said Appollis left after dark.

“She never said that. She said it was dark when she went to Kelly’s house, not that it was dark when Appollis left,” Erasmus said.

He also requested Harmse not to repeat what the witness had said.

“This is not a sophisticated witness. Please break your questions into bite-sized chunks.”

Lombaard’s cross-examination will continue on Wednesday.

NOW READ: Joshlin Smith: Court hears she was taken for her eyes and skin

Download our app

Published by
By Carien Grobler