Confession validity under scrutiny in ongoing Joshlin Smith trial

This week saw more intense developments in the Joshlin Smith trial, as the Western Cape High Court continued with a trial-within-a-trial to determine the admissibility of confession statements made by two of the accused. The legal proceedings are centred on the question of whether these confessions were made voluntarily or under duress.

Accused Claim Torture Led to Confessions

The focus of this phase of the trial is on Jacquen Appollis and Steveno van Rhyn, who both claim they were tortured by police officers at the Sea Border Police offices in Saldanha in March 2024. According to their testimony, the abuse they endured led to them falsely confessing to involvement in the disappearance of six-year-old Joshlin Smith, who was reported missing on 19 February 2024.

Appollis and Van Rhyn are standing trial alongside Joshlin’s mother, Kelly Smith, in connection with the child’s disappearance. Kelly allegedly left her daughter in Appollis’ care before she went missing.

Joshlin Smith trial

Police Testimony Disputed by Defence

The week began with Sergeant Dawid Fortuin, a member of the anti-kidnapping unit, taking the stand. He testified that both Appollis and Van Rhyn admitted to being involved in Joshlin’s disappearance during police questioning. Fortuin stated that he did not witness any abuse or torture inflicted on the accused during their time in custody.

However, defence attorney Fanie Harmse, who represents Appollis, challenged this claim, arguing that police coerced his client into confessing by threatening him and feeding him a fabricated narrative involving Kelly Smith and a plan to sell the child.

Fortuin was adamant that the accused volunteered information linking themselves—and others—to Joshlin’s disappearance. But Harmse questioned the veracity and origin of the statements, suggesting they were the product of intimidation and physical assault.

Van Rhyn’s Defence Questions Police Methods

On Friday, defence attorney Nobahle Mkabayi, representing Van Rhyn, cross-examined Captain Philip Seekoei, who had taken down her client’s statement. Mkabayi introduced video evidence in court that appeared to show Van Rhyn exhausted, injured, and disoriented, casting doubt on his capacity to provide a voluntary and informed confession.

She questioned why Seekoei continued the interview despite these visible signs that Van Rhyn was not in a fit state to be interrogated. Mkabayi argued that Van Rhyn’s rights may have been violated during this process, rendering the confession inadmissible.

Seekoei maintained that standard procedures were followed, but he faced persistent questioning over whether Van Rhyn had been properly assessed or medically cleared before the statement was taken.

Appollis Recounts Alleged Torture

The week wrapped up with Appollis himself taking the stand to testify about the events that led to his confession. Under questioning from Harmse, Appollis claimed that he was assaulted and psychologically manipulated by police officers. He described how detectives allegedly fabricated a confession statement and instructed him to repeat it, warning that further abuse would follow if he refused to comply.

He reiterated his earlier claims that the confession was not his own, but rather a version constructed by police to support a predetermined narrative about the child’s disappearance.

Trial-Within-a-Trial to Resume Next Week

The court is expected to resume the trial-within-a-trial on Tuesday, after taking a break on Monday. Judge Nathan Erasmus previously stated that he hopes to wrap up this portion of the proceedings soon so that the main trial can move forward.

The ruling on whether the contested confessions will be admissible could significantly shape the trajectory of the case, which has already gripped the nation with its complexity and emotional weight.