Joshlin Smith trial: Judge Nathan Erasmus criticises State for sloppy evidence

The State faced sharp criticism from Judge Nathan Erasmus on Thursday after he called out sloppy evidence gathering in the ongoing trial of Steveno van Rhyn and Jacquen ‘Boeta’ Appollis.

The trial, which is currently in a trial-within-a-trial phase, revolves around the allegations of police torture and forced confessions made by the accused.

State’s Evidence Under Scrutiny

The Western Cape Crime and Investigation Services’ Captain Philip Seekoei took the stand as the State’s witness. Seekoei, who serves as a Detective Court Case Officer (DCCO) at Wynberg Magistrate’s Court, was called to testify about the alleged confession made by van Rhyn.

His testimony followed that of Colonel Eddie Clark, who had earlier explained how van Rhyn’s statement was interrupted after the accused complained of hunger and the need to take medication. This led to the termination of the interview before it was completed.

Judge Nathan Erasmus

However, before the court could proceed with reviewing the documents, van Rhyn’s lawyer, Nobuhle Mkabayi, strongly objected to them being referred to as a confession.

Defense Disputes ‘Confession’ Claims

Mkabayi argued:

“This is not a confession. It is not tantamount, and I expected the court to make a ruling on whether this is a confession.”

Judge Erasmus agreed with her objection and ordered that the documents be referred to as a statement until he ruled otherwise.

To clarify the contents of the statement, video footage of van Rhyn’s interview was played in court. However, technical issues halted the playback, further highlighting the State’s lack of preparation.

Once the issues were resolved, the courtroom’s audio remained poor, leaving the gallery unable to hear much of what was being said.

Judge Questions Accuracy of Statement

Despite previous claims that van Rhyn had been forced into a confession under duress, the video showed him appearing calm and even smiling. This contradicted earlier allegations that he had been coerced into making a statement.

Judge Erasmus, determined to assess the allegations of police brutality, focused on van Rhyn’s physical condition in the footage. He noted that his wrists were visible, which would allow the court to determine if any bruising was present.

As the footage played, van Rhyn, who had previously appeared relaxed in court, suddenly sat up with a stern expression, intently watching the video.

However, as the video continued, Judge Erasmus noticed a serious inconsistency—not all of van Rhyn’s words were accurately recorded in the statement.

“There is wording missing from the document. I thought when doing something like this [statement], it would be recorded verbatim. This is such an important case. We are dealing with a child that went missing,” Judge Erasmus said.

State Defends Its Evidence

Advocate Swanepoel, representing the State, attempted to defend the quality of evidence, insisting that it was the best the prosecution had gathered.

However, Judge Erasmus was unimpressed and bluntly responded:

“As sloppy as this is, carry on…”

The gallery remained largely frustrated as most of the audio from the footage was inaudible, with only snippets being heard.

The State also revealed that they had footage of a ‘pointing out’ by van Rhyn, which they intended to play later in the trial.

Confession or Accessory After the Fact?

As the footage progressed, Judge Erasmus openly questioned whether the statement even qualified as a confession.

“As of now, this does not seem like a confession; it could be an accessory after the fact.”

This raised doubts about the legitimacy of the prosecution’s case, particularly in proving van Rhyn’s direct involvement in the crime.

Judge Erasmus then turned his attention to the State’s failure to inform him that the statement did not accurately reflect what was said in the video.

“Why was I not told this document is no reflection of what is happening here [in the video]?” he questioned.

His remark cast further doubt on the reliability of the State’s evidence.

Trial Continues

With serious inconsistencies in the State’s case, the trial is shaping up to be a battle over credibility and procedure.

The defense’s claim that van Rhyn was tortured into a confession remains a critical issue that Judge Erasmus must address.

The trial is set to continue on Friday, where more evidence and arguments will be presented.