Court proceedings against suspended attorney Zietta Janse van Rensburg took an unexpected turn today when her defence attorney, Marco Lamberti, turned his focus on Lowvelder’s previous reporting and the photographing of him and his client.

The fraud, forgery and uttering case was set down to start at 10:00, and they arrived minutes before proceedings began.

Photography dispute delays trial

When proceedings kicked off, Lamberti accused Lowvelder of being in contempt of court for taking photos outside the court at the police station’s entrance.

He told Lowvelder that magistrate Jacob Mamabolo ruled during court proceedings in April that the taking and publication of photos of both, but more specifically him, was prohibited.

Background to fraud charges

When the court case commenced in April, it marked nearly three years since Rita van den Berg laid charges against Janse van Rensburg.

During that hearing, Van den Berg and Grant Taylor testified about a signed agreement that raised concerns as Van den Berg’s signature appeared to be suspicious.

ALSO READ: WATCH | Nelspruit Magistrate’s Court remands Zietta Janse van Rensburg in custody

She testified that the signatures on the agreement were not hers and that she had never seen the settlement agreement before June 2023.

Van den Berg also said the documents did not originate from her own legal representative’s office.

Letters of demand exchanged

Shortly after Lowvelder’s April report on the proceedings, Lamberti sent a letter of demand to the newspaper stating: “A direction/ruling was made in open court to the effect that photographs of me were not to be published. Notwithstanding the above, photographs of me were published by your publication. In addition, aspects of the publication do not accurately reflect what transpired in court. In particular, the article’s account of the evidential exchange and ruling on objection is materially inaccurate.”

Lamberti then demanded that all photographs of him published in connection with the article in question had to be removed from all print, digital and social media platforms.

ALSO READ: Hawks action deepens Malalane legal saga: Zietta and Johan Janse van Rensburg arrested 

Lowvelder’s attorney Helene Viljoen informed Lamberti: “The presiding magistrate indicated that no application had been brought by the media to take photographs inside the court, and further noted the limits of the court’s jurisdiction outside the courtroom. There was no express order prohibiting publication of photographs, whether taken in court or otherwise. In the absence of a clear and binding court order, your allegation that publication was ‘unlawful’ is not sustainable.”

In the letter, Viljoen invited Lamberti to provide any information that would clarify his statement that the article was materially flawed: “You contend that the article contains material inaccuracies but fail to identify any specific statements alleged to be incorrect. Our clients remain committed to fair and accurate reporting in accordance with applicable law and regulation. Any allegations to the contrary can only be considered once properly articulated and corroborated.”

Lamberti never responded nor provided such evidence.

ALSO READ: Zietta Janse van Rensburg: Legal Practice Council moves to revive stalled disbarment case

Today, senior state prosecutor Tobie Steyn told the court he was ready to proceed and that his witnesses, Schalk de Waal and Kayla van Niekerk, were present.

Application rejected in court

When proceedings started, Lamberti addressed the court about Lowvelder’s presence and the fact that photographs were taken of him and his client on their arrival. Lamberti asked Mamabolo to order Lowvelder not to publish photos or incorrect information.

He claimed that his right to privacy as an individual and professional was infringed upon.

Mamabolo pointed out that Lamberti was approaching the wrong forum to pursue his application and said he was not going to grant such an order.

Senior state prosecutor Tobie Steyn opposed Lamberti’s request. He pointed out that the criminal court was not the right forum to hear the matter, as the media was not a party to the case between the State and Janse van Rensburg.

Also read: Courtroom cat-and-mouse continues in Janse van Rensburg disbarment saga

Steyn further probed Lamberti on why he had not pursued the matter since April, as there was enough time to make an application to the correct forum.

Mamabolo asked Lamberti whether the media should not have been served if an application was brought against them – something the magistrate listed as a requirement.

Lamberti said continuous reporting on the matter had an influence on Janse van Rensburg’s right to a fair trial, as Lowvelder was publishing the evidence of witnesses placed on record as the trial progressed. While he conceded that the media could be present during the trial, Lamberti said reporting should be done only once all evidence had been heard.

Mamabolo requested Lamberti and Steyn to join him in chambers to discuss the matter.

Everyone returned to court only at 13:30, and Lamberti indicated that he would take another avenue to address the media.

Before proceedings were postponed to tomorrow, Steyn requested Mamabolo to issue a warning to Janse van Rensburg, who was recording proceedings without due permission.

Lamberti apologised on behalf of his client for using a cellphone in court and said he would instruct her not to bring it to court in future proceedings. Mamabolo ordered Janse van Rensburg to comply.

De Waal, Van Niekerk and the investigating officer are set to testify tomorrow.