Community holds its breath as Joshlin Smith kidnapping trial reaches verdict

Scores of people are expected to descend on the White City Multipurpose Centre in Diazville Friday morning, where the Western Cape High Court has been sitting for the duration of the Joshlin Smith kidnapping trial.

Judge Nathan Erasmus is set to deliver judgment in the high-profile case that has gripped the Saldanha Bay community and beyond.

Joshlin Smith, six, went missing from her Middelpos, Saldanha Bay home on February 19, 2024. 

Her disappearance sparked a frantic search that quickly escalated into a major criminal investigation.

Her mother, Racquel ‘Kelly’ Smith, her boyfriend Jacquen ‘Boeta’ Appollis, and their friend Steveno ‘Steffie’ van Rhyn were subsequently arrested. 

All three pleaded not guilty to charges of kidnapping and human trafficking.

On Wednesday, both the State and the defence concluded closing arguments, paving the way for the court’s final ruling.

Public interest in the case remains intense. Community members from across the province are expected to travel to Diazville, with some planning to queue outside the venue before dawn.

Chadwick Fortuin, who has travelled from Piketberg, said he had been in Middelpos since the early days of Joshlin’s disappearance, assisting in search efforts.

“I feel my presence must be there to see that justice prevails, and we hope that there will be a positive outcome,” said Fortuin. “My plan for Friday is to queue outside the court from 4am.”

The White City Multipurpose Centre has served as a temporary courtroom since the trial began on March 3. Judge Erasmus acknowledged the logistical challenges ahead of the anticipated influx of spectators.

“I take it there will be a lot of people. There will be logistical arrangements, especially if the court is full,” he said. “I’ll be making a ruling on the seating arrangements.”

While the judge confirmed he expects politicians to attend proceedings, he made it clear that no special seating arrangements would be made for them. Only the accused and family members of the victims would be prioritised.

The State initially charged five individuals, including Phumza Sigaqa and the accused trio’s friend, Lourentia ‘Renz’ Lombaard.

However, charges against Sigaqa were later withdrawn due to lack of evidence. Lombaard turned State's witness and provided key testimony during the trial.

During the closing arguments, Smith's lawyer said it is unlikely that she confided in witnesses about any plan to traffic her six-year-old daughter, a central allegation in the State’s case.

Delivering closing arguments, defence lawyer Rinesh Sivnarain launched a scathing attack on the credibility of the State’s key witness, Lombaard.

“All the incidents that were testified about, by Ms Lombaard as well as the accused, happened under the influence of drugs,” Sivnarain told the court. 

He reminded Judge Erasmus that Lombaard had admitted to using methamphetamine two to three times a day in February 2024 and had been a habitual user for 16 years. 

“Even when explaining discrepancies in her confession, she claimed her mental faculties were impaired. She confirmed she was unreliable when she consumed drugs.”

Sivnarain characterised her as an opportunist who exploited Smith for food and favours, and ultimately turned on her to save herself when legal consequences loomed. 

“She admitted she was promised money by Kelly. She went along with that. She was going to gain — and she kept quiet. But when she realised the money wasn’t coming and she was going to prison, she turned. She would’ve said anything to distance herself.”

He added: “She lied even when given the last opportunity to speak the truth. She is a single witness. The cautionary rule applies. Her evidence is so poor, it cannot be relied upon.”

He told the court that the State had failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt and said there was no corroborating evidence from Accused 1 or 2 (Appollis and Van Rhyn) to support Lombaard’s version.

“There is no common purpose. If you consider the evidence alone, it is not just weak — it is dangerous to convict someone on that.”

Responding in the State’s closing argument, prosecutor Advocate Zelda Swanepoel conceded that Lombaard was not a perfect witness. 

“I concede she wasn’t the best witness. There can be criticism. But the test is whether the evidence is so bad that no court would believe it — and that is not the case here.”

Swanepoel said the State’s case did not rest solely on Lombaard’s version.

“If it had only been Ms Lombaard’s evidence, that would be a problem. But it isn’t. We’ve put the puzzle together piece by piece.”

She said both Accused 1 and 2 told Smith to tell the truth. “Three people knew the plan, and they all pointed fingers at Kelly. They said: ‘You know what you did.’”

Cape Times