The prosecutor questioned Steveno Van Rhyn over contradictions in his testimony and plea explanation.
Accused number two in the Joshlin Smith trial, Steveno van Rhyn, faced intense cross-examination on Thursday over his claims of police torture and coerced confessions.
The Western Cape High Court, currently sitting in Saldanha Bay, is holding a trial-within-a-trial to decide whether confession statements made by Van Rhyn and his co-accused, Jacquen “Boeta” Appollis, should be deemed admissible in the main trial.
Both men claim the statements were obtained through physical assault between 4 March and 5 March 2024.
Accused cross-examined in Joshlin Smith trial
During Thursday’s proceedings, state prosecutor Zelda Swanepoel questioned Van Rhyn over contradictions in his testimony and plea explanation regarding the alleged torture.
Van Rhyn had testified that he was taken to Vredenburg Hospital for a medical check-up on 6 March after police allegedly assaulted him the day before.
He claimed he did not inform the doctor of the real cause of his injuries because the police were present during the examination.
However, Swanepoel challenged this version, saying there was no record of the hospital visit.
“You were never medically examined on the 6th of March,” she said.
ALSO READ: Joshlin Smith trial: Accused says he was hung up and beaten by police before confession
While Van Rhyn responded that he couldn’t be certain but remembered going to the doctor, Swanepoel maintained otherwise.
“There’s no proof of that whatsoever.”
She further pressed Van Rhyn, highlighting standard police procedure which requires suspects to be medically examined before any confession is taken.
“Why was it your instructions that the reason why you were taken to Vredenburg for a medical examination was because of the injuries that you had suffered and not because of the fact that it is a procedure before a confession?”
Watch the proceedings below:
Van Rhyn insisted that his account was the truth.
“So why does that truth then differ?” Swanepoel asked.
“I don’t know,” Van Rhyn replied.
The prosecutor then asked him why he stated in court that only one police officer accompanied him for the medical examination, yet his plea indicated there were two officers present.
Van Rhyn further grilled
Further inconsistencies arose concerning Van Rhyn’s description of the plastic bag allegedly used during his torture.
He had testified that a see-through bag was placed over his head before the assault.
Swanepoel: “What would be the purpose of putting it over your head?”
Van Rhyn: “I don’t know; maybe to smother or suffocate me.”
Swanepoel: “But on your own version, you were able to bite through this plastic bag.”
Van Rhyn: “That’s correct.”
Swanepoel: “And then we heard yesterday in your testimony for the first time that then a see-through sack was used.”
READ MORE: Joshlin Smith kidnapping trial: Judge surprised at accused’s admission
Van Rhyn: “That’s correct.”
Swanepoel: “Why did we not hear of this bag earlier.”
Van Rhyn: “I must have forgotten about it.”
Later, Swanepoel accused the accused of changing his version of events.
“I’m just pointing this out to you, sir. We will argue that you are adjusting your testimony and your version as you go along,” she said.
Van Rhyn, however, denied the accusation.
