Joshlin Smith case — Why the court found the accused guilty

Adv. Zelda Swanepoel during the Joshlin Smith kidnapping trial at White City Multipurpose Centre on May 02, 2025 in Saldanha Bay, South Africa. The three accused of kidnapping and trafficking a Grade 1 Diazville Primary School learner learn of their fate as Judge Erasmus hands down judgement. (Photo: Gallo Images / Brenton Geach)

By Vincent Cruywagen

2 May 2025

The evidence of an evangelist, as well as the decision by Racquel Smith, Jacquen Appollis and Steveno van Rhyn not to testify, were key elements that led to their conviction in the Joshlin Smith human trafficking trial.

The conviction of Racquel “Kelly” Smith, Jacquen Appollis and Steveno van Rhyn on kidnapping and human trafficking charges in the Joshlin Smith case is a landmark ruling, according to National Prosecuting Authority Western Cape boss Nicollette Bell.

Commenting after Judge Nathan Erasmus handed down his guilty verdict in the Western Cape High Court, sitting in Saldanha Bay, on Friday, 2 May 2025, Bell commended the prosecutors – advocates Aradhana Heeramun and Zelda Swanepoel – and the investigation team for their hard work.

“Human trafficking is rife. The legislation is new, and this is a landmark decision for us. So from here on, we can still build, but tragically, the little girl Joshlin is still out there. So the search for her must go on,” Bell told the media after the ruling.

Joshlin Smith disappeared from the Middelpos informal settlement in Saldanha Bay on Monday, 19 February 2024. She was six years old at the time and would have celebrated her seventh birthday in October 2024. Her whereabouts remain unknown.

The court heard evidence that Joshlin’s mother, Smith, spoke to her boyfriend, Appollis, about the plan to sell Joshlin the day before the little girl went missing. The conversation was overheard by Van Rhyn and Laurentia Lombaard, who was initially charged in the case before turning State witness.

The three accused pleaded not guilty and denied the allegations they “sold, delivered or exchanged” Joshlin, a Grade 1 pupil at Diazville Primary, for money.

During the case, which began on 3 March 2025, Smith, Appollis and Van Rhyn chose to remain silent, deciding to neither take the stand nor call any witnesses in their defence.

Unpacking judgment

Crowds wait for Raquel Smith to leave court after the guilty verdict was handed down in the Joshlin Smith kidnapping trial in Saldanha Bay, South Africa. (Photo: Gallo Images / Brenton Geach)

Advocate Zelda Swanepoel during the Joshlin Smith trial in Saldanha Bay. (Photo: Brenton Geach / Gallo Images)

In his ruling, Judge Erasmus put significant emphasis on the testimony of evangelist Nico Coetzee. Coetzee was an acquaintance of Smith from Northern Cape, and on 3 March 2024, during a prayer service for Joshlin, he recognised her when she was called to the stage at church.

That was when he remembered what she told him in August 2023 when they ran into each other. He told the court that she had arranged to sell her children.

“She [Smith] told me she is waiting for people who were supposed to come to her who were supposed to come earlier but disappointed her. If they come this time and they do not have the full amount of R20,000 then she will be satisfied with R5,000,” Coetzee testified.

He further testified that Smith had claimed that in January or February 2024: “You will see with your own eyes what will happen in Middelpos and Diazville.”

Smith allegedly said: “It will look like a movie scene, of cars and people that will search but they will find nothing, because I will take the child very far.”

Read more: Joshlin Smith’s mother ‘talked of plans for daughter to be taken months before disappearance’

He’d also told his employer about Smith’s comments and the R20,000 she was allegedly promised before the information was in the public domain.

The court found Coetzee made a favourable impression during his testimony, and he had no personal motive to get involved in the case.

“More importantly, there is nothing said by the defence. What inference can be drawn from silence in this instance? It calls out for an answer because either he is not only not an evangelist, but also prophet to have known what was going to happen,” said Judge Erasmus.

Crucially, Coetzee’s evidence corroborated Lombaard’s, who was a participant in the crime before testifying against her friends.

Lombaard claimed Kelly said she was selling Joshlin for R20,000 and that she and Van Rhyn would receive a cut for their silence.

Her evidence, however, included multiple inconsistencies, starting when she gave her initial statement to police.

Read more: Closing arguments in Joshlin Smith trial highlight flaws and contradictions in witness testimony

“Then she comes to court and has a difficult time. So from the outset, she was not the perfect witness. Does it mean that if she was dishonest at a particular stage that I should disregard everything she said?” Erasmus asked.

He found aspects of her testimony had been confirmed. Lombaard said there was a conversation about selling Joshlin on the day before she disappeared, which was corroborated by Appollis. The R20,000 figure she mentioned was corroborated by Appollis, Van Rhyn and Coetzee.

“When one analyses the evidence of Lombaard, no credible findings have been made yet, [there’s] no evidence of corroboration because the evidence of Appollis and Van Rhyn were not admissible against Smith,” said Erasmus, referring to the statements Appollis and Van Rhyn made to police.

“But they are admissible against themselves, and if corroborates the State evidence that implicates Smith, it can only strengthen the state case on that evidence,” the judge said.

Read more: Joshlin Smith judgment due Friday after defence says State failed to prove case beyond reasonable doubt

The court also looked at the demeanor of the three accused from the time Joshlin disappeared. None of them took part in the search, which Erasmus said was because they knew that Joshlin had been sold.

The judge also referred to the 3 March 2024 prayer service, where Coetzee saw Smith. She was dancing and appeared to be enjoying herself, which the judge said was not the conduct of someone whose child has disappeared.

He condemned Smith, Appollis and Van Rhyn’s decisions not to testify: “You have a right to remain silent, [but] there comes a time where the evidence is such that it calls out for an answer, and yes, you may still exercise your right, but it has risk because the court can draw inferences.

“And the inference I draw is why not come and answer? You heard the evidence. Why not tell me the State lied? But your conduct was such from day one, there is no real interest.”

He then turned to the verdict.

“On the main count, I found that on evidence before me, Joshlin was exchanged. The fact is that her freedom of movement and liberty was inhibited, that in itself are the main elements of kidnapping. The evidence is from all scores, there were promises of payments,” said the judge.

He went to say depriving that Joshlin of freedom and liberty, and the fact that her whereabouts are still unknown, is unlawful

“In my view, the State succeeded in proving the guilt of Appollis, Van Rhyn and Smith on human trafficking and kidnapping.”

The trio are back in Western Cape High Court in Cape Town on 9 May when the court will begin sentencing proceedings. DM

Categories:

Tags:

DM is much better if you are signed in...

South Africa

Unpacking judgment