‘The witness is not sophisticated,’ says judge in Joshlin Smith case, warning defence to tread carefully

Laurentia Lombaard entered the witness box in the Joshlin Smith case after the tea break on Tuesday, 18 March, after completing her three-day evidence-in-chief on Monday in the Western Cape High Court, sitting in the Saldanha Bay Multipurpose Centre.

Her evidence is critical for the State to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the three accused, Racquel Smith, also known as Kelly, her boyfriend Jacquen “Boeta” Appollis and their friend Steveno van Rhyn, meticulously planned Joshlin Smith’s kidnapping and human trafficking on 19 February 2024.

During her evidence-in-chief, Lombaard shocked the court by claiming Joshlin’s mother, Smith, reportedly sold her child to a sangoma for R20,000. Lombaard told the court that the person who bought Joshlin, who was six years old when she went missing and has fair skin and green eyes, “wanted her eyes and skin”.

Read more: Shocking testimony unveils Kelly Smith’s alleged plot to sell six-year-old daughter Joshlin to a sangoma

During his cross-examination, advocate Fanie Harmse, representing Appollis, touched on facts known to the court about Lombaard’s drug use, but did not confront Lombaard about her accusations that they all collaborated to allegedly sell Joshlin.

Lombaard was initially charged with the trio, but turned against them when she abandoned her bail application and turned State witness. She says she was part of the alleged plot to sell Joshlin. In return for keeping silent, she says she was promised R1,000, which she never received.

In the summary of substantial facts, the State contends that Smith “communicated during August 2023 her plan to have her children taken away or sold and the plan was for this to happen in January or February 2024”.

This was corroborated by the testimony of Nico Steven Coetzee, who testified that in August 2023, Smith allegedly revealed to him her plan to abandon her children.

Lombaard alleged that she saw Smith speaking to a sangoma the day before Joshlin disappeared and Smith later revealed her plan to sell Joshlin.

Smith, Appollis and Van Rhyn were charged with human trafficking for exploitation and kidnapping following Joshlin’s 19 February 2024 disappearance from the Middelpos informal settlement in Saldanha Bay. The State contends that they “sold, delivered or exchanged” Joshlin.

The three have pleaded not guilty.

Defence warned 

The initial part of Harmse’s cross-examination of Lombaard focused on common facts such as her drug use, smoking with Smith and Appollis and that her boyfriend, Ayanda Letino, with whom she shared a shack, sold drugs.

Ayanda also operated a carwash and scrapyard in Middelpos. Lombaard revealed that Ayanda no longer lived in Saldanha Bay and had left in March 2024, before she was arrested.

Harmse said he found Lombaard’s claim strange that she, a drug user, asked Ayanda to stop selling drugs.

“I asked Ayanda to quit because he was a drinker. Most of the money he made from selling drugs he drank out. If he gets money from the carwash he also used it to buy wine,” she testified.

Questioned about her drug use, Lombaard told the court that she smoked drugs two to three times a day.

Harmse’s line of questioning then revolved around a SAPS bakkie that Lombaard said she’d spotted on Sunday, 18 September 2024. The police had come to inquire if Appollis had any knowledge of the theft of chickens at the farm of a person named Stefanus.

There were repeated questions posed to Lombaard, with each question presenting a different version, which caused her to become confused. 

Read more: Joshlin ‘is here in the informal settlement’, Kelly Smith allegedly told her SAPS sister

Judge Nathan Erasmus informed Harmse: “You will understand that the importance of this witness cuts both ways. Firstly the witness seems to, on the face of it, implicate the accused. Secondly, I have to decide at the end of the case whether I should grant this witness indemnity or not.

“So I want to be sure that what I hear and note is precise. I don’t want to make mistakes or limit the possibility of making mistakes as much as I can.”

One question was whether Lombaard was certain that she saw the police bakkie on 18 February 2024, as opposed to Appollis’ version, which contends that the police came the day before, on Saturday, 17 February 2024.

While Lombaard stuck to her story, Harmse repeated that she was mistaken and the police had come on Saturday rather than Sunday. 

Erasmus intervened firmly, saying, “This question is not allowed; it is being asked and answered.”

The judge said, “Mr Harmse, with all due respect, why do you have to repeat everything the witness says? Then it becomes difficult for the witness to follow. We know she testified in the chief and you already covered it with her. It was a Sunday. We dealt with why she said it was Sunday. You already put it to her it was on a Saturday and she gave an explanation.

“The witness we have here is not a sophisticated witness so break it up into small pieces if you can, bite-size chunks, so that we don’t have a long preamble; that is why I’m getting those long-winded answers. And repetition of everything, please, if we can just keep it short and sweet and get to the point.”

The trial continues on Wednesday. DM