As the trial-within-a-trial continues in the Joshlin Smith court case, the court has reviewed the footage of the alleged confession of Jacquen ‘Boeta’ Appollis.
The court remains in a trial-within-a-trial and it is important to note that Judge Nathan Erasmus is yet to rule on whether the alleged confession was indeed that or rather a statement.
The trial-within-a-trial stems from Appollis and his co-accused, Steveno van Rhyn claiming they were assaulted and tortured by police.
On Friday, before the footage was played in court, Appollis’ lawyer, Fanie Harmse, needed to place information on the record.
“There are contents of his statement by the accused that he was informed on what to say,” Harmse submitted.
Judge Nathan Erasmus questioned: “So, the crucial part of what happened was not his knowledge but what he was told to say?”
Harmse responded: “Correct, my Lord.”
Erasmus said that because facts were being distorted, the accused may be prejudiced.
He said there was a request to have this bit of the statement sealed, but, he has decided that whatever publication is made of the statement must be that the accused noted the specific portion did not come from him.
“I have made a decision, so for now it has not been found after it has been presented that it does not come from his own knowledge, so when the media publishes this, I’m ordering that it must be done in context,” Erasmus ordered.
“Yes, there are faceless people publishing stuff, but it binds them. Any publication that’s contrary to this order might be met with contempt charges. I hope I made myself clear.”
In his confession, conducted by Colonel Adrian Pretorius and filmed by Warrant Officer Sylvester Meyi from the Local Criminal Record Centre (LCRC), Appollis is read his rights and given forewarning of what will transpire during the process.
Appollis said on Sunday, February 18, 2024, the day before Joshlin Smith was reported missing, her mother, Kelly Smith, told him she was tired of the child.
“She also said she is tired of Tasha (the woman who reared Joshlin), and Joshlin’s father (Josh) who were always trying to take Joshlin,” he said.
He further stated on the Monday, February 19, 2024, the last day Joshlin was ever seen, Kelly returned home from work during lunchtime.
He said that Kelly had arranged with a ‘Makalima’ and he had to take Joshlin to her after she left for work. Makalima is the alleged sangoma, a name that has come up in various testimonies in the trial-within-a-trial.
She allegedly told Appollis that Makalima was going to pay her R20,000, he said.
Appollis said he and Van Rhyn were at his place, and Kelly left before 1pm; at this time, he told Joshlin she needed to go with them.
Joshlin asked no questions and abided.
When they arrived at Makalima’s house, Van Rhyn told the woman his wife (Kelly) had sent him, and they were invited in but he did not sit down.
When he asked about the money, Makalima allegedly stated she and Kelly had already spoken about remuneration.
Appollis said he and Van Rhyn left, Joshlin stayed behind playing with four other children younger than her.
It should be noted that this important part of the statement is being disputed, and Appollis’ legal representative said that this part of his confession was told to his client and does not come from his own knowledge.
It will be up to Erasmus to make a ruling to find whether these alleged confessions are admissible and can be handed up as exhibits in the main trial.
The matter continues on Monday.
robin.francke@iol.co.za
IOL
