KEY POINTS
- Judge Erasmus criticizes the State’s presentation of evidence.
- Audio issues hamper critical video footage in court.
- State faces backlash for presenting incomplete documents.
The trial involving Joshlin Smith reached a turning point when Judge Nathan Erasmus sharply criticized the State for presenting sloppy evidence.
On Thursday, Captain Philip Seekoei, a Detective Court Case Officer (DCCO) from the Western Cape Crime and Investigation Services, took the stand. The court called him to support a statement made by Steveno van Rhyn, one of the accused.
However, the proceedings quickly unraveled when Judge Erasmus noted a lack of preparation on the part of the State, particularly regarding the alleged confession made by van Rhyn.
The court was already in the midst of a “trial within a trial” where van Rhyn and Jacquen “Boeta” Appollis claimed police officers tortured them on March 4 and 5, 2024.
Video footage raises further doubts over the confession
Earlier in the day, Colonel Eddie Clark had testified about taking van Rhyn’s alleged confession. Clark stated that van Rhyn had been hungry and needed medication, which led to the abrupt termination of the interview.
However, van Rhyn’s defense attorney, Nobuhle Mkabayi, immediately objected to calling the documents presented by the State a “confession,” stating that they did not meet that definition.
After considering Mkabayi’s objections, Judge Erasmus ordered the documents to be referred to as a statement until a final ruling was made, IOL stated.
The court then viewed video footage of van Rhyn making his statement, but technical difficulties interrupted the process. When the footage resumed, it was apparent that the sound was inaudible to the public, further compounding the State’s problems.
Judge Erasmus delivers sharp criticism of the State’s case
As the video continued, Judge Erasmus scrutinized the footage, looking for any signs of van Rhyn’s alleged abuse. He noted that the footage was crucial for understanding the torture claims, and any bruising on van Rhyn’s wrists would be visible during the interview. However, as the court proceeded, Judge Erasmus discovered that parts of the statement were missing, which prompted further frustration.
“There is wording missing from the document. “I thought a statement like that would be recorded verbatim,” he said. This is such an important case. We are dealing with a child that went missing,” the judge remarked.
Despite these concerns, Advocate Swanepoel for the State argued that it was their best evidence.
Judge Erasmus retorted, “As sloppy as this is, carry on…” He disapproved of the evidence handling.
As the trial progressed, the judge pressed the State, questioning why it hadn’t labeled the document correctly.
At this point, he suggested the statement might not qualify as a confession, possibly just accessory evidence.
The trial is set to continue on Friday.
