<\/p>\n
The remaining defence attorneys in the Joshlin Smith trial are scheduled to deliver their closing arguments at the Western Cape High Court on Wednesday morning.<\/p>\n
Next to address the court will be Nobahle Mkabayi, representing Steveno van Rhyn, followed by Rinesh Sivnarain, who acts for Racquel Kelly Smith.<\/p>\n
Tuesday\u2019s proceedings concluded with advocate Fanie Harmse, appearing on behalf of Jacquen \u201cBoeta\u201d Appollis (Accused 1), delivering a strong challenge to the credibility of State witness Lourentia \u201cRenz\u201d Lombaard. Her testimony, delivered under Section 204, has been pivotal to the prosecution\u2019s case.<\/p>\n
Lombaard, who initially faced charges before turning State witness in exchange for possible indemnity, implicated all three remaining accused \u2013 Appollis, Van Rhyn (Accused 2), and Kelly (Accused 3) \u2013 in an alleged plot to sell Joshlin for exploitation.<\/p>\n
However, Harmse contended that Lombaard\u2019s account was fraught with \u201cmaterial contradictions\u201d and therefore unreliable.<\/p>\n
Harmse highlighted inconsistencies between Lombaard\u2019s Section 204 statement, her confession and her evidence in chief, particularly concerning the timeline of a key conversation she claimed to have overheard between Kelly and Appollis. In earlier versions, the discussion allegedly took place on Sunday, 18 February 2024, but she later testified that it occurred on the morning of 19 February \u2013 the day Joshlin disappeared.<\/p>\n
\u201cThat is a material discrepancy,\u201d Harmse told the court.<\/p>\n
He further noted contradictions about when and how Joshlin was allegedly taken to a white VW Polo by Kelly. In her Section 204 statement and confession, Lombaard claimed the event occurred around lunchtime on 19 February, but her courtroom testimony differed and was subsequently \u201ccorrected\u201d during proceedings.<\/p>\n
Harmse argued the contradictions were not minor, but \u201cmutually exclusive,\u201d stating, \u201cThey can\u2019t both be true.\u201d<\/p>\n
Judge Nathan Erasmus weighed in, acknowledging that there were \u201csignificant issues with consistency\u201d in Lombaard\u2019s account. However, he also noted that the accused had elected not to testify to refute the allegations.<\/p>\n
The State, led by advocate Zelda Swanepoel, maintained that Lombaard\u2019s evidence remained credible in substance, despite some inconsistencies in detail.<\/p>\n
Closing arguments from the defence teams of Van Rhyn and Smith are expected to follow.<\/p>\n
Judge Erasmus indicated he may be ready to deliver judgment by Friday.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The remaining defence attorneys in the Joshlin Smith trial are scheduled to deliver their closing arguments at the Western Cape High Court on Wednesday morning. Next to address the court will be Nobahle Mkabayi, representing Steveno van Rhyn, followed by Rinesh Sivnarain, who acts for Racquel Kelly Smith. Tuesday\u2019s proceedings concluded with advocate Fanie Harmse, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-238884","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","6":"category-news"},"yoast_head":"\n