HARD TO JUDGE

Tensions peaked in the Western Cape High Court yesterday as Judge Nathan Erasmus pressed the State on key contradictions in the case of six-year-old Joshlin Smith’s disappearance. 

While the prosecution insists there was an agreement to sell the child, Erasmus raised concerns about how star State witness Lourentia “Renz” Lombaard’s testimony lined up with that of the accused.

Lombard’s testimony forms the backbone of the State’s case, after she was granted immunity in exchange for full disclosure in the events surrounding Joshlin’s vanishing on 19 February 2024. 

Renz alleges that Racquel “Kelly” Smith, conspired with Jacquen “Boeta” Appollis, and Steveno “Steffie” van Rhyn to sell Joshlin for R20 000, a plan supposedly conceived months before it was executed.

However, Judge Erasmus is not keen on accepting Lombaard’s version in full. 

He noted a key inconsistency - while Lombaard testified that she witnessed Kelly personally handing Joshlin over to a person in a white VW Polo, the accused, Boeta and Steveno, instead referred to delivering the child to a woman named Maka Lima. 

“How do I deal with that?” Erasmus asked the State. “If I can’t find that [car handover] to be beyond a reasonable doubt, then we are sitting with the discussion on Sunday, 18 February 2024, and the reason for the action to be taken.”

In response, Advocate Zelda Swanepoel for the State argued that the exact handover mechanism, whether at a car or a house, was not central to proving the crime.  

Boeta said he watched over the child, and during the interrogation, he told the police that he and Steveno went to deliver the child to Maka Lima.

Steveno insisted he was asked to “come along” without knowing the full plan of handing the child to Maka Lima. Yet, both made damning admissions in later statements and interviews.

He acknowledged returning to Maka Lima’s home to collect his “cut” of R5,000, while Appollis described the incident as a “verruiling vir die kind” (exchange for the child), referencing the R20 000 allegedly promised.

But it’s the relationship between Boeta and Kelly that the State argues is key. Advocate Swanepoel painted it as abusive and toxic. 

That frustration with her family, also echoed by Mr Nico Steven Coetzee’s testimony, fed into the motive.”

Judge Erasmus, however, is still weighing whether enough independent corroboration exists to accept Lombaard’s account in full.  

The State remains firm that even if certain details differ, such as the precise handover location, the core facts hold. 

It argues that all three accused were involved, that the child was exchanged, and that the inconsistencies are natural in cases where co-conspirators may try to shield themselves or each other.