Day 25 of the Joshlin Smith trial continued the trial-within-a-trial with the cross-examination of Sergeant Fortuin, who had been involved in the interviews of both Jacquen Appollis and Steveno van Rhyn on 4 March 2024.
Joshlin Smith trial today: Here’s a breakdown of what happened
Defence counsels Advocate Fannie Harmse and Advocate Nobahle Mkabayi focused their questioning on alleged procedural missteps and claims of police misconduct, particularly around whether Jacquen and Steveno were coerced into confessing.
Advocate Harmse began the day’s proceedings by asserting that Jacquen did not know the men who brought him into the Sea Border compound and had no opportunity to change clothes from the moment of his arrival on 4 March 2024 until after he was officially detained the following day.
Harmse argued that this consistency in clothing contradicted Fortuin’s inability to describe what Jacquen was wearing, despite being present in the boardroom with him.
Harmse pressed Fortuin about carrying a clipboard during the initial interview but failing to take any written notes. Fortuin responded that the information received at the time was minimal and any important details would be recorded later in a formal statement. Harmse countered that this undermined the reliability of Fortuin’s oral evidence, particularly as no contemporaneous notes were made.
Harmse continued to attack the credibility of Fortuin’s recollections, suggesting that Jacquen’s mother could confirm her son had no injuries prior to arriving at Sea Border—contrary to what was later seen in his confession video.
Despite repeated questioning, Fortuin maintained that he had no knowledge of Jacquen being assaulted and couldn’t comment on what happened before he arrived at the compound.
After an extended exchange that introduced no new material, Harmse concluded his cross-examination.
Advocate Mkabayi then took over, shifting focus to Steveno van Rhyn. She questioned Fortuin’s general interview strategy and whether he had reviewed Steveno’s prior statements before conducting the March 4 interview.
Fortuin said inconsistencies in Steveno’s and the co-accused’s earlier statements were noted during a briefing led by Captain Lombard, and that the aim was to obtain clarifying information to aid in the search for Joshlin Smith.
Fortuin confirmed that Steveno was one of the last people to see Joshlin before her disappearance and had referenced Kelly Smith and Phumza Sigaqa (Makalima) during his interview.
Mkabayi disputed this, claiming Steveno never identified either woman.
She alleged that officers monitoring Steveno while Fortuin was in another room fed him information that led to his statements. Fortuin denied this, saying that if such interference had occurred, Steveno would have mentioned it during the interview.
Asked why Steveno wasn’t released to return the next day, Fortuin explained that the developing nature of the information—particularly concerning Kelly Smith and Makalima—required immediate follow-up. He stressed the urgency of the situation, given the disappearance of a six-year-old child.
Mkabayi is expected to complete her cross-examination of Fortuin on the next court day, after which Captain Seekoei will take the stand once more for further cross-examination.
Here’s what happens next in the trial-within-a-trial
The trial-within-a-trial is nearing its end. The judge indicated that once Captain Seekoei completes his testimony, the state will close its case. The defence is expected to begin presenting its case from Wednesday, 9 April 2025.
Judge Nathan Erasmus also made several procedural announcements: Kelly Smith may return to court depending on her health; a final ruling on the trial-within-a-trial is expected soon after the defence concludes its case; and the court aims to return to the main trial the following week.
Due to an immovable booking, the trial venue will be unavailable on Friday, 25 April 2025.
The judge urged counsel to resolve scheduling for that date and mentioned the possibility of holding a court session on 1 May 2025, a public holiday, to ensure that evidence in the main trial is completed by month’s end.
Court adjourned with all parties expected to return for the final state witness in the trial-within-a-trial.