Joshlin Smith trial: State relying on witness who fooled three cops – defence

Stevano van Rhyn’s defence attorney, Nobahle Mkabayi, told the Western Cape High Court in Saldanha on Wednesday that the state relied on Lourentia “Rens” Lombard’s ‘inconsistent’ evidence to prove its case.

The trial involving Joshlin’s mother, Racquel “Kelly” Smith, and her co-accused, Jacquen “Boeta” Appollis and Steveno van Rhyn, continued on Wednesday. Both the state and defence delivered their closing arguments.

Mkabayi took the stand and told Judge Nathan Erasmus that the state had failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, and only relied on “speculation” from a witness who previously admitted to being high when Joshlin went missing.

ALSO READ: Joshlin Smith trial: State insists 6-year-old was sold for R20k in closing arguments

Joshlin disappeared from the family’s home in Saldanha Bay on 19 February 2024.

All the suspects have pleaded not guilty to the charges.

Mkabayi: ‘Key witness is a liar’

Mkabayi disputed the credibility of the prosecution’s key witness, Lourentia “Rens” Lombard, and said the state failed to conduct proper investigations.

She questioned how Lombard remained quiet through the alleged assaults and torture, and only confessed several months later.

ALSO READ: Joshlin Smith trial: ‘Why does your truth differ?’ — State questions suspect’s claims of police abuse

“We’ve got this 204 [Lombard] who was arrested on 13 March and appeared in court and didn’t confess. From March to 21 October 2024, the same person who was tortured seven months before says, ‘Now I can confess’. That alone says a lot about this 204,” Mkabayi told the court.

The defence told the court that Lombard went through at least three police officers and told them the same story, only to later admit that she had lied because she was scared.

“When confronted under cross-examination, she said, ‘No, I was scared’ – scared of what? ‘I was scared, maybe I had a relapse of drugs, so that’s why I lied.’ What surprised me more was that she knew she was lying and continued. In fact, she fooled an officer. That’s the 204 we have before this court.

ALSO READ: Joshlin Smith trial: Accused says he was hung up and beaten by police before confession

“As if that was not enough, she went to do the confession. These people who took her statement and confession are trained; they are the pride of our country – law enforcement officers. We’ve got a 204, for the second time, who lied before an officer. She then appeared before Captain Lombard and did not stop lying. When her statement was brought before this court, it didn’t stand the test of cross-examination.”

Lombard’s ‘lies and contradictions’

Mkabayi said Lombard’s testimony was filled with lies, contradictions and inconsistencies.

“If we take the defence when she first appeared, that she was relapsing from drugs, was she even relapsing from drugs after seven months on 21 October when she lied? Was she still relapsing when she lied before Captain Philip Seekoei? No. I asked her, ‘Do you believe in God? Were you brought up in a Godly family?’ She said ‘yes, my parents told me about God.’ I asked her, ‘Do you know the consequences of lying?’ She said ‘yes’. She even said, ‘My teachers at school told me about God and the consequences of lying.’ But she didn’t stop lying.

“We cross-examined her; she lied to my colleague for Appollis, and she lied to me and my colleague for Kelly Smith. Now, surprisingly, the state is convincing the court: ‘Now that I have failed to prove the elements of kidnapping and trafficking, please, let us convict the three on speculation.’ Where is that coming from? They’re relying on the evidence led by 204, who lied and fooled three police officers.”

Joshlin trial: ‘When did it become a crime to sell a microwave?’

Mkabayi said her client, Van Rhyn, was selling a microwave the day Joshlin went missing. His only sin was visiting his friends, who are also accused in the case.

The state used the fact that the accused were together to prove that they were discussing selling Joshlin to a sangoma.

“My client didn’t deliver Joshlin. They didn’t prove that. They didn’t prove intent and unlawfulness,” said Mkabayi.

ALSO READ: Joshlin Smith trial: ‘I’ve made an order,’ judge tells defence as proceedings get tense

“My learned colleague argued yesterday that there was an act. What act? Who acted? When? With whom? When you traffic, you don’t do it alone; there is always another person. Where was this act, and with whom? Silence.

“My client on the 19th was selling a microwave. When did it become a crime in South Africa to sell a microwave? When did it become a crime in South Africa to visit your friend? I would argue that the common purpose was to sell a microwave, not to kidnap and traffic anyone. My colleague argued that Joshlin was delivered for the purpose of exploitation for slavery. By who? Where? Who are the exploiters? We want to know.

“For four hours, I was listening for the state to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. No compelling evidence before this court, no strong evidence before this court suggesting that my client committed an offence of trafficking in person, kidnapping or any conspiracy.

“There is no evidence before this court that my client delivered Joshlin to anyone for any amount. My learned colleagues noticed that they failed to discharge the onus. They’re pleading with this court to convict Van Rhyn on speculation drawn from the evidence of a 204.”

READ NEXT: Joshlin Smith trial: Defence grills investigating officer