Joshlin Smith sentencing: ‘I didn’t ask for it,’ says defence after witness profiles state prosecutor

Steveno van Rhyn’s defence attorney, Nobahle Mkabayi, told the Western Cape High Court in Saldanha on Tuesday that some of the factors that should be considered when sentencing human trafficking cases were not relevant to the Joshlin Smith case.

Joshlin’s mother, Racquel “Kelly” Smith, and her co-accused, Jacquen “Boeta” Appollis and Van Rhyn, returned to the court, where sentencing proceedings began.

On 2 May, Judge Nathan Erasmus found that the state succeeded in proving the guilt of the three accused in counts 1 and 2 in the Joshlin Smith disappearance case.

ALSO READ: Joshlin Smith trial: Court finds Kelly and co-accused guilty

On count 1, he found them guilty of trafficking in persons. They were also found guilty of kidnapping, count 2.

Joshlin disappeared from the family’s home in Saldanha Bay on 19 February 2024.

Joshlin case: Defence grills witness

Mkabayi cross-examined expert witness Marcel van der Watt, president of the National Centre on Sexual Exploitation (NCOSE), following his detailed analysis of the case.

During the cross-examination, Van Der Watt informed the court that he had been requested by State Prosecutor Zelda Swanepoel to conduct an analysis of the case, and that he would not receive compensation for the work done.

“When arrangements were made, I was not informed I would be compensated. There was no agreement made on compensation. I will not be compensated for this,” he told Mkabayi.

She asked him if he had worked with Swanepoel before, to which he admitted.

ALSO READ: Joshlin Smith trial: ‘I’ve made an order,’ judge tells defence as proceedings get tense

“I absolutely knew Swanepoel. She has been a phenomenal leader in the field of human trafficking. Everyone knows Swanepoel; she has done phenomenal work in this space, particularly in prosecuting trafficking matters. She’s an incredible source of knowledge and well-respected for her integrity. So, yes, I definitely knew Swanepoel before this matter,” said Van Der Watt.

“Thank you for that profile, although I didn’t ask for it,” said Mkabayi.

Human trafficking sentences

She then turned to the Prevention and Combating of Trafficking in Persons Act, which lists factors that must be considered by the court when sentencing human trafficking cases.

Mkabayi asked, “Would I be correct if I said you are being compensated for your testimony today?”

“You have listed the factors that the state must look at in considering sentencing human traffickers and kidnappers. Is there any significant role that you know the accused played in human trafficking?” she asked.

“You haven’t seen the victim, you haven’t interviewed the victim, you don’t know the whereabouts of the victim.”

ALSO READ: Joshlin Smith trial: State relying on witness who fooled three cops – defence

However, Judge Erasmus intervened and told Mkabayi that the section of the Act she was using was not relevant, as it was not in the witness’ evidence.

“The witness never mentioned the work in his analysis on Sub C. If you have read the report, which I hope you did. He deals with A, J, F, G and to an extent, I. That’s in the report. So, the question you asked is not allowed because it’s not part of this witness’s evidence. It’s clear the question was already asked and answered in the context of listing the factors from A through to L. The question is disallowed for the reasons I’ve given. I have made a ruling.”

“There is no evidence before this court as to how the victim is kept, because the whereabouts of the victim are not known, and you haven’t interviewed the victim yourself,” Mkabayi insisted.

The proceedings continue.

READ NEXT: Joshlin Smith trial: Defence grills investigating officer