The trial will continue on Tuesday.
The Western Cape High Court, sitting in Saldanha Bay, has ruled that the confession statements made by the two accused in the Joshlin Smith trial are admissible.
A trial-within-trial came to an end at the White City Multipurpose Centre in Diazville on Friday, after Judge Nathan Erasmus heard final arguments on the admissibility of the confession statements by Van Rhyn and his co-accused Jacquen “Boeta” Appollis.
The two men alleged that they were assaulted and forced into making statements to the police in connection with Joshlin’s disappearance on 19 February 2024.
Joshlin Smith trial: Accused’s testimonies scrutinised
After Van Rhyn and Appollis both testified and were cross-examined, prosecutor Aradhana Heeramun presented the state’s closing arguments.
She argued that the credibility of the two accused was “shredded” and of “poor quality”.
“What we were told in their plea explanations changed. What we were told in terms of instructions that were put to state witnesses also developed.
“Then, when the accused took the stand, those instructions or their evidence further developed,” Heeramun said.
ALSO READ: Joshlin Smith trial: ‘Why does your truth differ?’ — State questions suspect’s claims of police abuse
The prosecutor said the independent evidence of the doctors’ medical examination of both men at the Vredenburg Hospital bolstered the state’s case.
“It was the doctor’s evidence that the allegations, as I put and demonstrated to them, was highly improbable.
“In fact, their evidence was that they would have expected to see fractures, more injuries as opposed to what they saw,” she contended.
Ruling on confessions
Appollis’s lawyer Advocate Fanie Harmse read out a 2015 judgment dealing with confessions, pointing out that the ruling warned courts to exercise caution when determining the admissibility of such statements.
“Experience of courts with police investigations of serious crimes has shown that police officers sometimes are known to succumb to the temptation of extracting confessions from suspects through physical violence or threats of violence rather than engage in a painstaking task of thoroughly investigating a case.
“This is why the law provides safeguards against compelling an accused to make admissions and confessions that can be used against them in a trial,” he said.
READ MORE: Joshlin Smith kidnapping trial: Judge surprised at accused’s admission
Van Rhyn’s legal representative, Nobahle Mkabayi, maintained that her client’s constitutional rights were not read to him before the confession was taken.
However, Erasmus ruled that the confessions can be used by the state in the main trial.
“You would have noted that I have not referred to the statements as confessions or admissions. I do that deliberately as I do not want to create the impression that I have pre-judged the issue,” the judge added.
The trial will continue on Tuesday.
